Why do the same people that idolize Sherrill bash Stans to no end?

[o_riverdawg]

They actually have quite similar resumés of you stop and think about it.
1. Both inherited programs that were historically horrible with isolated success at a few points.
2. Both brought those historically crappy programs up to a respected level (Sherrill took State to 6 bowl games and won the SEC West once, Stans has taken State to 6 NCAA tournaments, won the SEC West 5 times and the Overall SEC once)
3. Neither coach had a breakthrough that took MSU to a national level (Sherrill lost 4 of his 6 bowl games and only won more than 8 games in a season once. Stans has never gotten to a Sweet 16.)
4. Sherrill lost control in his last 3 seasons and the program nosedived back into misery. Stans has plateaued the past few years, but the program is still in pretty good shape.

Can someone tell me if I'm missing something here? I know it's different sports, but it seems like both coaches have very similar numbers. Yet a vast majority of six packers worship at the feet of Sherrill while bashing Stans to no end. Please enlighten me as to why this is.

 

[dawgfan14]

The one thing that I can think of is this. I remember so many people wanted Sherrill fired when he was the coach just like Stans now yes some people defended him kind of like Stans now. Then once he got fired and people started realizing people kept downing him for the first couple years then they saw how Croom coached and realized that Sherrill was better. After that people started supporting Sherrill again because they realized that us firing him for Croom was a mistake and I really think tha people are scared the same will happen if we get rid of Stans. </p>

 

[dawgstudent]

give us 5 years once Stansbury is not coaching at State and he will be loved. Bo Bounds has always made this point on his radio show - after about 10 years at a school and unless you are winning championships consistently - things get stale with the same coach.

 

[FlabLoser]

Sherrill inherited a crappy program. Stansbury inherited a program that had been to the final four. Granted, those final four players were all gone, but the final four still says something.

 

[Roy Munson.sixpack]

by no means great but had at least had SOME post season success. Now, not so much.

 

[dogfan96]

in football everything will have to align perfectly for us to compete at the national level.. as long as we're going against LSU, Bama, Auburn, UT, Florida just in our own conference. Plus you need more good players to win in football and we usually don't get enough of those players... at least not compared to the bigger schools. So what Sherrill did was harder to do at MSU. SEC schools (except UK) don't really care about basketball.. and you only need 1 or 2 really good players to have a good team.

 

[bulliegolfer]

give us 5 years once Stansbury is not coaching at State and he will be loved. Bo Bounds has always made this point on his radio show - <span style="font-weight: bold;">after about 10 years at a school and unless you are winning championships consistently - things get stale with the same coach.</span>

and that is exactly where we are.

 

[Coach34]

basically, winning in football is at least 5x harder than it is in basketball. 2 or 3 good players make you a top contender in basketball- football takes a helluva lot more than that

 

[futaba.79]

loaded with SEC quality players. Had Sherrillarrived in '86, pretty sure his start would've been a little different.

</p>

 

[MadDawg.sixpack]

for football is much, much lower than for basketball. In football, all you have to do is win 25% of your conference games and 4 ooc games and you are in a bowl and the fanbase is jumping for joy. Win 25% of your conference games in basketball, even if you sweep the entire non-conf schedule, and you are in deep trouble. Stans is expected to win a minimum 75% of his conference games and finish in the top 15 nationally to be considered succesful and not have people calling for him to be fired.

 

[dogfan96]

just awful.. we might tie for the West with mississippi and neither team is anywhere near what I would consider "good".

 

[Indndawg]

Wow, just wow

 

[patdog]

We had missed both the NCAA and the NIT for 2 straight years. In the previous 7 years, we had 2 NCAA bids, 2 NIT bids and 3 seasons end after the SEC tournament. That's not a terrible program, and Williams left it in a hell of a lot better shape then what he started with. But basically when Stans took over, we were a bad program that had had one really good group of players come through and lead us to 2 isolated good seasons.</p>

 

[GloryDawg]

<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">It's because Sherrell got us to the SEC championship game in football, which is a big deal, way more big then SEC championship in basketball. Richard Williams got us to the final four. Both coaches had some really crappy years but it did not matter. They did something that no other coach in Division I sports in the State of Miss has ever done. I love both Jackie and Richardfor what they did. I was around and it was a good feeling. I think Mullen brought a lot of that feeling back last football season, I hope he can keep it up. If Stansbury could ever get to at lest the elite eight, a lot of the Jackie love would go to him and a lot of the Croom style hate would leave,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span></p>