I am not writing this because I don't like Rick Stansbury. I"m doing it because I love Mississippi State. As an alumni of MSU, I want the best for it. And I believe a change in the basketball program would be best right now.
I've heard all the arguments from the Stansbury apologists. Here are just a few: 'we just don't have the talent on this team to compete', 'we don't have enough depth right now', 'we aren't going to be good next year anyway'.
I disagree with all of that reasoning (which is below the break), but that's beside the point. The point is: if not now, then when? When is Mississippi State supposed to have the talent, when will they have the depth, when are they going to be good'? Whose fault is it there 'isn't enough talent'? Whose fault is it that there 'isn't enough depth'? Whose fault is it that we aren't going to be good next year?
When is Stansbury going to achieve these things? Let's see, he had a boatload of talent and depth on the 2010 team but they couldn't make the tournament. State bombed 2011, 2013 looks like a disaster. If Stans doesn't pull it together this year we are looking at four straight years without going to the big dance. And the '09 team only made it because they won the SEC Tournament; and they ended up with a '13' seed facing Washington in their neighboring state.
When exactly is Stansbury going to 'put it all together'? And how long do we have to wait? Are you going to tell me that Arnett Moultrie, Dee Bost, Rodney Hood and Renardo Sidney don't provide enough talent to win in the SEC? I'm not talking about a national title here...just a bye in the first round of the SEC tourney. We should be competing for a top 4 seed in the NCAA Tourney, but we're grasping for straws to get a '12' seed.
I think we can just about put a stamp on wasting Dee Bost's career. Here you've got a guy who is the all-time assists leader in MSU history, will end his career with the MSU record for most games started, and has been one of the best point guards in the SEC his entire career. Yet these are your results: win SEC Tourney and get a '13' seed, NIT, 17-14 year, and then whatever 2012 ends up. And if '12 is anything but a Sweet 16 appearance then you can book it - complete waste of his career at State.
Depth is nice, but it's a luxury. You win in basketball with superstars. If you don't believe me, watch the NBA. You might not think Arnett Moultrie is a superstar, but if he isn't he is close. And he has a facilitator in Dee Bost. All the rest of the guys are role players, and pretty good ones too. It would be nice to have a freshman version of Bost and Moultrie on the bench but we don't. Need I remind you that the 2004 team played with six guys (Marcus Campbell played about 2 minutes per game in conference)?
Here's one thing you don't do: keep coaches around because you won't be good the next year. Where does this kind of thinking come from? Is it just me, or do you hire a coach to rebuild your program? If we want a new coach then go ahead and get him in house so he can recruit his own players, coach the current ones, and start building the program back his way. The whole point of firing Stansbury is that we don't agree with the direction of the program, so why would we want him to influence it for another year?
Stansbury is a good coach, he keeps MSU pretty competitive, but when exactly are we going to be a 'solid' team. You know, a team that has a single digit seed in the big dance? If he couldn't do it last year, can't do it this year, doesn't do it next year, then when is it going to happen?