Do You Wish We Had Kept Stans?

[tcdog70]

Never played a game we didn't have a chance to win? That's some revisionist BS.

Ricks teams had multiple games virtually every season where we got blown out by 20 or more points.

For every ten games Stans played he won 61/2 of them.


Taking over the helm as the Bulldogs head coach in 1998, Stansbury led his team to postseason tournament play 11 times in 14 seasons (six NCAA and five NIT tournaments), with five consecutive post-season tournament appearances, the first MSU basketball coach in history to accomplish this feat. His 2001?02 MSU team compiled the most wins in a single season in school history (27). Also achieved the highest national ranking in school history in 2003?04, No. 2 in the country (finished 26?4). Stansbury also owns MSU's record for consecutive 20-win seasons with four from 2001 to 2005 and again from 2006 to 2010.[6]

[SPMT]

Yes

[SPMT]

Would take him back yesterday. MSU is not blue blood. He got it.

[BrunswickDawg]

Name the 20.point losses? He got robbed at least twice playing Kentucky. Multiple games every year. How the hell did he win 20 games a year. Every team loses some blow outs.but at the tip I always thought we had a chance to win.

They may not have been multiple every year - but they were enough to say we weren't prepared to win every game -
Just a sample -
2001-2 - Cincy L 56-90; UF L 48-76 (MSU went 27-8 and won the SEC T)
2004-05 - Bama L 49-98

Stans was a good coach, who needed to go 2-3 seasons before we fired him. Howland is a good coach who has brought us back to a respectable level. At no point other than 1 season(2003-4)under Stans did I ever think we had a team that could beat all comers.

[Ifyouonlyknew]

Here's the correct answer

Would you take back the 01-02 - 04-05 Stans? Hell yes in a heartbeat.

Would you take back the 05-06 - 11-12 Stans? No sir not at all.

[confucius say]

Howland has won at least 20 games the last 3 years.

Stans won 20 5 of last 6 years and when his defenders pointed that out they were told big damn deal. Which again is my point in this thread. Howland at MSU = Stans at MSU success wise. We put our program through hell and ran off a bunch of fans to get to the same place we already were.

[Ifyouonlyknew]

Stans won 20 5 of last 6 years and when his defenders pointed that out they were told big damn deal. Which again is my point in this thread. Howland at MSU = Stans at MSU success wise. We put our program through hell and ran off a bunch of fans to get to the same place we already were.

You're just skipping the point where Howland had to bring us from hell because of Rick Ray. Stans needed to go. We needed to not hire Rick Ray. If we hire a competent coach after Stans those 3 years in the wilderness never happen & we don't have to rebuild from scratch. Just because the wrong hire was made with Ray doesn't mean it was the wrong decision to fire Stans. If Leach doesn't do well at MSU that doesn't mean we should've kept Moorhead.

[confucius say]

You're just skipping the point where Howland had to bring us from hell because of Rick Ray. Stans needed to go. We needed to not hire Rick Ray. If we hire a competent coach after Stans those 3 years in the wilderness never happen & we don't have to rebuild from scratch. Just because the wrong hire was made with Ray doesn't mean it was the wrong decision to fire Stans. If Leach doesn't do well at MSU that doesn't mean we should've kept Moorhead.

I'm not skipping it at all. I'm not holding bens first two years against him at all. this whole thread I've said his sample size is his past 3 years. I think that is fair, but we can use just his last 2 years or just his last 1 year if you'd like. Using any of those sample sizes, howland at MSU = Stans at MSU: solid but not great.

[Ari Gold]

Name the 20.point losses? He got robbed at least twice playing Kentucky. Multiple games every year. How the hell did he win 20 games a year. Every team loses some blow outs.but at the tip I always thought we had a chance to win.

The East and West divisions really help pad his stats. Shit we won west a few times with a 8-8/ 9-7record..
and name a 20 point loss?? Seriously? You don?t think he lost games by 20+?

[Todd4State]

You're just skipping the point where Howland had to bring us from hell because of Rick Ray. Stans needed to go. We needed to not hire Rick Ray. If we hire a competent coach after Stans those 3 years in the wilderness never happen & we don't have to rebuild from scratch. Just because the wrong hire was made with Ray doesn't mean it was the wrong decision to fire Stans. If Leach doesn't do well at MSU that doesn't mean we should've kept Moorhead.

You're right. Unfortunately it fuels fire for the "we can't fire so and so because we might end up with Rick Ray" told you so crowd.

[tcdog70]

The East and West divisions really help pad his stats. Shit we won west a few times with a 8-8/ 9-7record..
and name a 20 point loss?? Seriously? You don?t think he lost games by 20+?

Sure, his last 5 years he lost 7 games by 20. 3 of them in his 15-15 year. Seriously, find some reason to throw dirt on the winnest Coach in MSU]history. We won the west in football with 2 losses but you ain't complaining about that. Like I said Stan haters gonna hate--the best basketball played in MSU history and you seriously want to complain. Throw out the 15-15 year and he lost by 20 less than once a year. It is basketball, sometimes you get blown out, but not like was implied, like it happened all the time.

[tcdog70]

I'm not skipping it at all. I'm not holding bens first two years against him at all. this whole thread I've said his sample size is his past 3 years. I think that is fair, but we can use just his last 2 years or just his last 1 year if you'd like. Using any of those sample sizes, howland at MSU = Stans at MSU: solid but not great.

I think winning every road game in the SEC is pretty great. Winning the SEC title is pretty great. When Ben does that then I'll agree Ben =Stans.

[confucius say]

The real question here is will Ben, or whomever we hire, elevate our program to a sustained level of success above that of stans? Right now, 8 years later, the answer is no.

[Todd4State]

Sure, his last 5 years he lost 7 games by 20. 3 of them in his 15-15 year. Seriously, find some reason to throw dirt on the winnest Coach in MSU]history. We won the west in football with 2 losses but you ain't complaining about that. Like I said Stan haters gonna hate--the best basketball played in MSU history and you seriously want to complain. Throw out the 15-15 year and he lost by 20 less than once a year. It is basketball, sometimes you get blown out, but not like was implied, like it happened all the time.

People criticize Jackie's last three years at MSU all the time. And they should. Doesn't make him anything less than a great coach at MSU. It also doesn't mean we shouldn't have fired him in 2003 either.

Why do some MSU fans want to keep a relic of a coach whose times has clearly passed because they won the SEC at one point in time in their career? Do you really want things to get so bad with a legend because of what they did in the past and cause a massive rebuild that no one can succeed from? It's crazy.

And these coaches don't need to work 25 years in their life to be set. I could coach MSU for two years like Moorhead and pull a Tech and 11 and be set for life with what MSU pays. Moorhead made what? 5 million in two years? To tell us to kick rocks. Sign me up for that.

[Coach34]

Thats the thing- the Stands Cult always looks at him like its always 2004. They forget about all the drama and problems that had crept into the program. Had we kept him another year it wouldnt have been another step into beyond obvious as that 2013 would have been awful with Hood leaving and all the freshmen.

Nobody is saying Kermit is some awesome coach- but Kermit damn sure would have been a better hire than Ray- and that was obvious even in 2012. Thats where the problem lies- the terrible decision of hiring Ray after getting rid of Stands is what set the program back.

But Stands was solid and always has been. He's the same at W. Kentucky now. 3 seasons- no NCAA bids but solid teams. Was on the Bubble in Year 2.

[BB30]

Ben gets some leeway there sure. But he in 5 years is still not where stans was in four years. And I think the 1 extra year leeway is fair considering it's not like stans took over a world beater (comparing the roster of stans first team in 97-98 vs bens in 15-16 is not all that different, as Ben had an all sec post guy in ware, a Sr sword, a jr Ready, and q and Malik as freshman along with contributions like Fred Thomas and Holman).

And the eye test doesn't reveal a lot of difference between stans teams and Ben teams. Just feels like we blew up the program just to get what we basically already had.

Howland was building from the basement not the ground ha. Stans was already a part of the team when he was hired and had been there for some of our best seasons.

The two aren't comparable when it comes to the shape of the program they took over.

Stans had fan support from the get go. Howland has seen a mostly empty arena even with his better teams. Makes it awful hard to recruit when there were more people watching the players when they were in high school than college.

I think one of our biggest issues with consistently winning since Howland has been here is the fanbase not buying in and packing the Hump.

Look at what happened when Mullen got here and the fans got behind him and packed the stadium. We haven't done that with basketball and it has definitely hurt us I believe.

[maroonmania]

Thats the thing- the Stands Cult always looks at him like its always 2004. They forget about all the drama and problems that had crept into the program. Had we kept him another year it wouldnt have been another step into beyond obvious as that 2013 would have been awful with Hood leaving and all the freshmen.

Nobody is saying Kermit is some awesome coach- but Kermit damn sure would have been a better hire than Ray- and that was obvious even in 2012. Thats where the problem lies- the terrible decision of hiring Ray after getting rid of Stands is what set the program back.

But Stands was solid and always has been. He's the same at W. Kentucky now. 3 seasons- no NCAA bids but solid teams. Was on the Bubble in Year 2.

Yep, that's the thing. While Kermit Davis would definitely have not been any big time hire in 2012, in fact not even really a notable hire, if you just compare him directly against hiring Rick Ray then it should have been a Kermit hire all the way. Not only did Kermit have D1 HC experience at MTSU and much more experience overall but he was an MSU guy. Ray wasn't even the top assistant at Purdue at the time. Hiring Ray, even if it had worked, would still have been awful on paper. Of course there was always the story about us not pursuing Kermit because of some NCAA recruiting issue he had from way back in the 90s at TA&M but I don't know how much about that.

[MadDawg]

Tell me the difference between Stans last 4 years & Howland last 3. Here's a hint.... You can't.

Stans last 4 years got him fired. Howland's last three years have been his high water mark.

[confucius say]

Stans last 4 years got him fired. Howland's last three years have been his high water mark.

Yep. But to be fair, I think you do have to give Ben a little more time before you can evaluate him fully. Maybe he can break through and elevate our program. But at this point, Ben at MSU = Stans at MSU.