I just still dont understand the bitter Stands supporters

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Liverpooldawg

Maybe if certain folks had supported Stans instead of trying to get him fired for 5 years it might have........that works both ways. The open defiance on the bench started well after the smear campaign started.

---

You mean like Timmy Bowers telling the CL that he didnt want to run what Stands had called in the huddle during the time-out to win the Bama game in 2005- and just did what he wanted??? Or Gary Ervin?

The simple difference was that group had alot more character than what came after them

*clicks thread* **vomits everywhere**

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coach34

That quote was also made before he knew Sidney and Deville werent going to be allowed back. You dont think it's possible he looked at what was left and said there is no ****ing way I'm staying here with what's left???

---

I really don't care about this debate anymore or the semantics of the situation. I was simply replying to your original post which showed a complete lack of self-awareness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoopsDawg

By and large people wish they were born into Ole Miss stock? that's one of the dumbest statements I have ever read.

We aren't signing Malik bub.

---

No shit on Malik, but thanks for showing your "inside" knowledge. Listen BUB, just because you show your ass on a message board it doesn't mean that what I'm saying isn't accurate. Stans was a recruiter and nothing more. Most people know that- sorry you don't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by randyholloway

No shit on Malik, but thanks for showing your "inside" knowledge. Listen BUB, just because you show your ass on a message board it doesn't mean that what I'm saying isn't accurate. Stans was a recruiter and nothing more. Most people know that- sorry you don't.

---

Here y'all go again: Throwing out the idea that Stans was not an actual coach. How can we ever make it stop? Pretty incredible that a person who can't coach had a winning record vs. every team in Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Arkansas over a long tenure. Coaches are apparently not needed. It's all luck.

While I disagreed with C34's years of attacks on Stans, and while he did have the power to make SPS basically unreadable for long stretches, I think it's a stretch to say he influenced the attitudes of players. I also think it's a stretch to say that Scott Stricklin and Mark Keenum "fired" Stans because of C34's constant criticism.

Technically Stans wasn't fired, right? I certainly have no insider knowledge but reading between the lines of all published reports and messageboard chatter I think Keenum and Strick were surprised and caught off guard when Stans took the retirement offer. Keenum gets tired of public embarrassments and inside reports that concern him, so he and Strick put together a list of requirements for Stans and what the consequences are for not meeting those - or if he's tired of all the BS he can take a nice retirement package.

Stans says "**** y'all, I've been around here way longer than either of you, you can't give me ultimatums" and walks away. I would guess that Strick had discussions with agents of several possible candidates and had a plan that didn't include Ray, and for various reasons Plans A,B,C and D evaporated. In the best circumstances it's never appealing to be the first guy to follow a legend. We didn't have the SECN money yet, so we couldn't money whip the top candidates enough to overcome their hesitation. Maybe the well was poisoned by the pro-Stans crowd too.

At this point if good candidates are available and interested, I would pull the plug on Ray. Seems like a good guy, but that has little to do with succeeding in college basketball. The next coach doesn't have to follow a successful "legend" and we have the funds to money-whip them if they are the right candidate.

All that may be totally wrong, but that's my theory until something convinces me differently.

And while it serves no productive purpose, I can't really blame anyone for busting C34's balls for starting a thread complaining about Rick Ray "complainers".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DancingRabbit

While I disagreed with C34's years of attacks on Stans, and while he did have the power to make SPS basically unreadable for long stretches, I think it's a stretch to say he influenced the attitudes of players. I also think it's a stretch to say that Scott Stricklin and Mark Keenum "fired" Stans because of C34's constant criticism.

Technically Stans wasn't fired, right? I certainly have no insider knowledge but reading between the lines of all published reports and messageboard chatter I think Keenum and Strick were surprised and caught off guard when Stans took the retirement offer. Keenum gets tired of public embarrassments and inside reports that concern him, so he and Strick put together a list of requirements for Stans and what the consequences are for not meeting those - or if he's tired of all the BS he can take a nice retirement package.

Stans says "**** y'all, I've been around here way longer than either of you, you can't give me ultimatums" and walks away. I would guess that Strick had discussions with agents of several possible candidates and had a plan that didn't include Ray, and for various reasons Plans A,B,C and D evaporated. In the best circumstances it's never appealing to be the first guy to follow a legend. We didn't have the SECN money yet, so we couldn't money whip the top candidates enough to overcome their hesitation. Maybe the well was poisoned by the pro-Stans crowd too.

At this point if good candidates are available and interested, I would pull the plug on Ray. Seems like a good guy, but that has little to do with succeeding in college basketball. The next coach doesn't have to follow a successful "legend" and we have the funds to money-whip them if they are the right candidate.

All that may be totally wrong, but that's my theory until something convinces me differently.

And while it serves no productive purpose, I can't really blame anyone for busting C34's balls for starting a thread complaining about Rick Ray "complainers".

---

now this is a quality post

These people are stupid, no You're stupid, bla bla bla. Slow day on the newsroom run controversial political story. Slow day on ED run a Stans post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coach34

And this is the heart of the matter.

Many of these guys havent supported Ray for 1 second- and pulled back their monetary support with it. But they want to bitch when we arent getting the same results.

---

You have ZERO room to talk about not supporting a coach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chef dixon

There is no reason at all to even reply in threads like this.

---

I'm afraid there will always be Stansbury threads. If we ever do get our program turned around, there will be the threads 'see I told y'all we could do better'. And if we keep losing, there will be more of these kind of threads. We are forever doomed for more Stansbury threads.

I was close to Stans, and can just speak for myself at the present, but never have I been contacted. Except for chasing a few stock prices, have never been one to throw good money after bad, so its just as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K9 Avenger

This is spot on...don't forget that many of the same egos that helped Stans have refused to help Ray...all out of spite. Pride goeth before the fall...

---

who thought stans deserved more time? much like stans had to go, rick ray now has to go.

Can we put a moratorium on discussing Stans? No one is going to ever change their mind on him. Regardless of whether you think he should or shouldn't have been let go, it's over. He's gone. It's way past time to be debating on the present and not on the past.

Even Obama has stopped blaming Bush for his own shit show.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shannondawg

Even Obama has stopped blaming Bush for his own shit show.

---

We should give ray 8 years too then***

I do want ray to get next year though

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DancingRabbit

While I disagreed with C34's years of attacks on Stans, and while he did have the power to make SPS basically unreadable for long stretches, I think it's a stretch to say he influenced the attitudes of players. I also think it's a stretch to say that Scott Stricklin and Mark Keenum "fired" Stans because of C34's constant criticism.

Technically Stans wasn't fired, right? I certainly have no insider knowledge but reading between the lines of all published reports and messageboard chatter I think Keenum and Strick were surprised and caught off guard when Stans took the retirement offer. Keenum gets tired of public embarrassments and inside reports that concern him, so he and Strick put together a list of requirements for Stans and what the consequences are for not meeting those - or if he's tired of all the BS he can take a nice retirement package.

Stans says "**** y'all, I've been around here way longer than either of you, you can't give me ultimatums" and walks away. I would guess that Strick had discussions with agents of several possible candidates and had a plan that didn't include Ray, and for various reasons Plans A,B,C and D evaporated. In the best circumstances it's never appealing to be the first guy to follow a legend. We didn't have the SECN money yet, so we couldn't money whip the top candidates enough to overcome their hesitation. Maybe the well was poisoned by the pro-Stans crowd too.

At this point if good candidates are available and interested, I would pull the plug on Ray. Seems like a good guy, but that has little to do with succeeding in college basketball. The next coach doesn't have to follow a successful "legend" and we have the funds to money-whip them if they are the right candidate.

All that may be totally wrong, but that's my theory until something convinces me differently.

And while it serves no productive purpose, I can't really blame anyone for busting C34's balls for starting a thread complaining about Rick Ray "complainers".

---

Best, most well-rounded basketball post I've ready in several months. Thanks for this one...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shannondawg

I was close to Stans, and can just speak for myself at the present, but never have I been contacted. Except for chasing a few stock prices, have never been one to throw good money after bad, so its just as well.

---

This is a real travesty that I don't understand from Strick's side... Unless there was something that went on during the cohen transition period that made him decide that ardent supporters of the previous regime would just have to buy back in on their own schedule. Still a pretty big screw up on his part to not be making this phone call and at least attempting to mend fences(and trying to sell you a left field loft, lol)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raytoraid83

*clicks thread* **vomits everywhere**

---

This, .... definitely this!

Whenever this board gets boring or slow 34 starts a Stans thread with the same shit different day .Forget Stans , post about the worst HC is the SEC and hammer his ass like you did Stans. If you didn't like having a top of the Sec basketball program how can you sleep at night with this piece of shit coach and record setting losers. You need counseling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoopsDawg

Really Coach, you don't understand the bitterness on this board?

I will explain it to you. The bitterness comes from the fact that people perceive this as your board and you were on a one man, 5 year mission to get Stans fired. You got your way and this mess is the result. Now more people are interested in Women's Hoops than Men's Hoops. Our program is decimated. There were several posters that warned against your line of thinking saying things like: look what happened at Arkansas, look what happened at AU, well now we are at those levels and below.

Stans should have been given one more year for 2 reasons:

1) give him a chance to put the Sidney Show behind him and move forward or
2) give our AD a chance to have a legit coach lined up

---

Absolutely. I cannot understand anyone still saying it was better to get rid of Stans. At the time since you didn't know the future, I can understand the argument. But "after seeing the future", I cannot understand anyone arguing it was the right decision. Our program would be in a better place - no question. The situation now is: men's basketball is irrelevant. Nobody goes to games and the Hump is dead - and it use to be so much fun and great to go. We get excited to beat a team that is 1-11 in the SEC. OM has passed us by, and they were never the better program with Stans here. I have paid my Bulldog dues and bought my 4 floor level tickets even though all my friends/relatives gave up. I have been to 3 games in 3 years and was bored to tears. Not one person has asked for my tickets. Plus, I have big State friends that don't even watch us on TV. I have watched one game on TV this year, and - again - was bored to tears. Coach - you asked for this and you continue to defend this crap. Have fun watching this team - you and a few others. And, you can buy my tickets and pay the dues next year, because I - along with many others - will not. (I do feel sorry for the guys who committed to our previous staff and have to live thru this.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mcdawg

Absolutely. I cannot understand anyone still saying it was better to get rid of Stans. At the time since you didn't know the future, I can understand the argument. But "after seeing the future", I cannot understand anyone arguing it was the right decision. Our program would be in a better place - no question. The situation now is: men's basketball is irrelevant. Nobody goes to games and the Hump is dead - and it use to be so much fun and great to go. We get excited to beat a team that is 1-11 in the SEC. OM has passed us by, and they were never the better program with Stans here. I have paid my Bulldog dues and bought my 4 floor level tickets even though all my friends/relatives gave up. I have been to 3 games in 3 years and was bored to tears. Not one person has asked for my tickets. Plus, I have big State friends that don't even watch us on TV. I have watched one game on TV this year, and - again - was bored to tears. Coach - you asked for this and you continue to defend this crap. Have fun watching this team - you and a few others. And, you can buy my tickets and pay the dues next year, because I - along with many others - will not. (I do feel sorry for the guys who committed to our previous staff and have to live thru this.)

---

Youve watched 1 game this year, huh? So in other words your opinion on our basketball team is strictly based on your feelings and nothing youve actually seen?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msstate7

Youve watched 1 game this year, huh? So in other words your opinion on our basketball team is strictly based on your feelings and nothing youve actually seen?

---

It is based on the losing record, the lack of star players, our boring offense, etc. I use to plan around our games and now I have no interest in doing that. And, a lot of others have decided the same thing by the crowds and lack of interest. I am not going to waste my valuable time on watching. (I am actually watching the women's team, and I know when they are playing. Couldn't tell you when the guys are playing. Did you see the State-UK women's game the other night? A whole lot more fun to watch than the men's team - plus each win/loss means something. Our men's team - a win or a loss means nothing. Give me that back and I may reconsider.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mcdawg

OM has passed us by, and they were never the better program with Stans here.

---

2006-2007...State- 21-14...8-8...Ole Missus- 21-13...8-8
2007-2008...State- 23-11...12-4..Ole Missus- 24-11...7-9
2008-2009... State- 23-13..9-7...Ole Missus- 16-15...7-9
2009-2010...State- 24-12...9-7...Ole Missus- 24-11...9-7
2010-2011...State- 17-13...9-7...Ole Missus- 20-14...7-9
2011-2012...State- 21-12...8-8...Ole Missus- 20-13...8-8

Stands vs Kennedy head to head seasons:

Stands- 129-75...55-41 in the SEC
Kennedy- 125-73...46-50 in the SEC

So- the 6 years Stands and Kennedy went H2H Stands won 4 more overall games and 9 more SEC games. Thats pretty close to even

All we had to do was get rid of Stans you said. You must be proud of what we have accomplished since you got your way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Liverpooldawg

All we had to do was get rid of Stans you said. You must be proud of what we have accomplished since you got your way.

---

I didnt say thats "all we had to do"...but there are things that have gotten better since he left

That was a direct quote from one night in Six Pack. What exactly in terms of wins and losses, the real bottom line, has got better?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Liverpooldawg

That was a direct quote from one night in Six Pack. What exactly in terms of wins and losses, the real bottom line, has got better?

---

please show me the quote??

The real bottom line is more than wins and losses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coach34

I didnt say thats "all we had to do"...but there are things that have gotten better since he left

---

Which things have gotten better? This is a shit show that you practically begged for and now you have it. At least be a man and admit that you were wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coach34

please show me the quote??

The real bottom line is more than wins and losses.

---

It was something like "anybody would be better than Stans" and all we had to do to get better was get rid of him. If the bottom line isn't wins and losses what is it then? You got what you wanted. Are you happy now?

So was what coach said "a direct quote" -- or "something like"? And if it was "something like", why are you adding quotations to your own statement?

Coach said alot of outlandish stuff about Stans at times -- and I don't think even he would deny that -- but you still need to produce the source quote for the approach you took to arguing it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engie

So was what coach said "a direct quote" -- or "something like"? And if it was "something like", why are you adding quotations to your own statement?

Coach said alot of outlandish stuff about Stans at times -- and I don't think even he would deny that -- but you still need to produce the source quote for the approach you took to arguing it.

---

Are you a lawyer? That was what he said. NOW I MIGHT HAVE MISSED A PERIOD OR A COMMA OR SOMETHING. I'm not NewYorkOperaDog, I don't file away links for use 3 years later. I'm glad he is happy with what he got. I wish I was.

it's just a damned shame stans SO mis-evaluated sydney. it was his undoing. who knows what would have happened if he had just done the right thing and kicked sydney off the team after HI. no coach should EVER be that invested in one single player.

34 and others were just tired of no sweet 16's for so long then the sydney saga broke the camel's back.

hindsight's always 20/20 but it's looking very cutcliffesque at this point. we've definitely gone from a B+ to a D- team.

comparing the AU and UGA hires then seeing us pay 1M to Ray is a head scratcher. I miss being hated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Liverpooldawg

Are you a lawyer? That was what he said. NOW I MIGHT HAVE MISSED A PERIOD OR A COMMA OR SOMETHING. I'm not NewYorkOperaDog, I don't file away links for use 3 years later. I'm glad he is happy with what he got. I wish I was.

---

I'm someone that recognizes incoherent/straw man arguments that are likely to devolve into psychobabble and more straw man arguments when challenged. Which you've now shown to be true multiple times in this thread. Now you are conveniently applying phantom positions to people that disagree with you. I'd ask you to link where Coach ever said "he is happy with what he got", but you've already proven that you'll call yourself "directly quoting" while unable to produce any evidence that the position ever existed in the first place. The reason, in this particular case, you can't produce that evidence -- is because it doesn't exist.

17 Rick Ray
17 Rick Stansbury
and 17 u Coach34 for continuing to bring this Shit up.

Stansbury did have to go. Rick Ray didn't have to be hired, but he was and now our program is even worse for it. Stans had to go cause the inmates ran the asylum. Ray has to go cause he can't coach for Crap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coach34

Nobody likes losing. Nobody is happy about the state of the program currently. We have traded constant drama and embarrassment around the program for losing on the court and falling to the bottom of the SEC. It sux.

But how anybody can claim Stands needed another year is beyond me. I dont get it. The team full of Sword, Fred, Ware, Wendell Lewis, and Jalen Steele was going to be a shitty one no matter who coached it. But besides that:

I cant fathom how anybody can try to justify giving Stands another year after Renardo Sidney. Think about this and the lack of control our HC had- we had to leave Sidney behind to stay here in the States when our team went to Europe to bond and play in the Fall. Why did we have to leave him behind you ask? Because we were terrified he would be drug tested by the NCAA on the trip- as teams are subject to be. How can you be so powerless as a HC to allow that to stay on your team? The embarrassment of the stories of Sidney going to "workout" with John Lucas??? Moultrie being suspended for failing multiple drug tests. You dont get a 3 game suspension for one failed test ya know. If you cant see that a change HAD TO BE MADE after all that- I just dont know what to tell you. Getting rid of Sidney wasnt going to make it get better- Sidney didnt make the other guys do drugs. Ray had to kick 2 others off for multiple failed tests once he got the job. It wasnt going to get any better under Stands.

Lastly- before you bash Stricklin again- think about that. He just got rid of a coach that had let things get so bad- nobody on the damn team could pass a drug test. He had just had a HC come to him and explain he was leaving one of his starting basketball players behind on the Europe trip because he was too much of a drug risk. But that he was still going to keep him on the team. So when Strick was having to make another hire- you can bet all this played a part in his decision-making.

Ray may not be the answer- but we made the correct decision in making the coaching change. We dont have the drama surrounding our program anymore and that is tremendous improvement. We just have to get more talented players on campus- whomever can do that and coach them.

---

The bottom line is this. Rick had let the program get so bad that Scott was getting turned down by multiple mid major head coaches, and he knew nothing would change if he had done what some alumni/former players wanted and hired Kenny Payne. Rick Ray essentially took a job he was likely never going to be able to win with. The coach that succeeded Rick Stansbury was doomed to fail due to the mess he was inheriting, unless the administration is patient and gives them 5-6 years like Baylor did with Scott Drew.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mparkerfd20

17 Rick Ray
17 Rick Stansbury
and 17 u Coach34 for continuing to bring this Shit up.

Stansbury did have to go. Rick Ray didn't have to be hired, but he was and now our program is even worse for it. Stans had to go cause the inmates ran the asylum. Ray has to go cause he can't coach for Crap.

---

You know, I can actually agree with this. It's a rare MSU fan who can admit both things are true. Most think one or the other should have or should stick around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engie

I'm someone that recognizes incoherent/straw man arguments that are likely to devolve into psychobabble and more straw man arguments when challenged. Which you've now shown to be true multiple times in this thread. Now you are conveniently applying phantom positions to people that disagree with you. I'd ask you to link where Coach ever said "he is happy with what he got", but you've already proven that you'll call yourself "directly quoting" while unable to produce any evidence that the position ever existed in the first place. The reason, in this particular case, you can't produce that evidence -- is because it doesn't exist.

---

Believe what makes you happy man. I bet you DO file away links for use years later. Good for you, lol. Bottom line: Men's basketball is way worse now than when we fired Stans by the only objective measure that matters, wins and losses. It's actually hilarious watching some of y'all trying to dance around that highly inconvenient fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coach34

2006-2007...State- 21-14...8-8...Ole Missus- 21-13...8-8
2007-2008...State- 23-11...12-4..Ole Missus- 24-11...7-9
2008-2009... State- 23-13..9-7...Ole Missus- 16-15...7-9
2009-2010...State- 24-12...9-7...Ole Missus- 24-11...9-7
2010-2011...State- 17-13...9-7...Ole Missus- 20-14...7-9
2011-2012...State- 21-12...8-8...Ole Missus- 20-13...8-8

Stands vs Kennedy head to head seasons:

Stands- 129-75...55-41 in the SEC
Kennedy- 125-73...46-50 in the SEC

So- the 6 years Stands and Kennedy went H2H Stands won 4 more overall games and 9 more SEC games. Thats pretty close to even

---

You left off the head-to-head record, and the overall record of Stans entire tenure versus OM. Add that and let's debate some more.

Its sad to say, but I was a lot more excited about Ole Miss losing last night, than I was about us winning yesterday. Ole Miss losing cost them, our winning did nothing for us. This is from a person whose week was affected by our wins and losses in the past.

Its not just about wins and losses, its about perception, And my perception is when we hit absolute rock bottom, maybe Stricklin will do something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shannondawg

Its sad to say, but I was a lot more excited about Ole Miss losing last night, than I was about us winning yesterday. Ole Miss losing cost them, our winning did nothing for us. This is from a person whose week was affected by our wins and losses in the past.

Its not just about wins and losses, its about perception, And my perception is when we hit absolute rock bottom, maybe Stricklin will do something.

---

Sorry, but that OM loss didn't hurt them that much. They're still in the tourney.

Seems this Thursday you're in a real pickle. Do you detest ray or Om more? OM loses to us and they're on the outside looking in. We win and ray has another quality win this year to get to .500 and 6-7 in the sec