The natives were already getting restless with Williams after his second straight crappy season. Since hiring Stansbury we have not returned to that level of suck. Do you ever wonder why you are the only one on the planet that says Brady, Gotfried, Heath, and Pelphrey are good coaches? I mean does it ever cross your mind?Coach34 said:
The great Trent Johnson...
- Thread starter MSUCostanza
- Start date
on. lawrence? look i wish we ad LR, but he isn't an nba player. he was in the league a few years on one of the worst teams and never played. he isn't/wasn't an nba player. meanwhile, brady, who you for some reason think was one of the top coaches in the sec had nba talent year in and year out and could BARELY do better than a coach you wouldn't piss on if he were on fire. give me a break.
The argument that players do not get better under Stansbury is BS too. Anyone remember Varnado as a freshman? How about Rhodes? Ravern Johnson? Winsome Frazier? Timmy Bowers? Zimmerman? Phil Turner? For every one that did not get better there were 3-4 that did improve. Of course C34 will just say that the players did it themselves because it fits his moronic arguement better. How many of those guys I listed were recruited by major top programs?
in the NCAA tournament when we pounced on Stanford in the first round with Gary "Apple Turnover" Ervin leading us. He also beat him in the SEC tournament last year so Stansbury has won the more important games when him and The Great Trent Johnson meet head to head.
According to you:
<span style="text-decoration:underline">You don't have to be good to be successful. But you do have to be successful (on a national level) to be considered good.</span>
Do you agree with this entire statement. Because you're already a hypocrite, I just actually want to gather proof of it, going forward.
<span style="text-decoration:underline">You don't have to be good to be successful. But you do have to be successful (on a national level) to be considered good.</span>
Do you agree with this entire statement. Because you're already a hypocrite, I just actually want to gather proof of it, going forward.
He'd have been fired after a couple more losing seasons. And YOU can't dispute that Brady is the proof that a flash in the pan good season or two isn't going to protect your *** when you have more losing seasons than winning ones (in the conference at least).
I love how every loss is Stansbury's fault, and when we do win like last year, he obviously got lucky. His coaching had absolutely nothing to do with winning the SEC tournament
Stansbury has never had a player have more than a cup of coffee in the NBA. Not one. So the theory that Stansbury recruits top talent to make up for his awful coaching ability doesn't hold water. Stansbury is great at getting good college players overlooked by other schools (Bowers, Zimmerman, Bost, Jarvis) and getting their maximum talent out of them. That's the sign of a pretty good coach.
In trying to build up Trent Johnson, Peaches has to run down John Brady. I wonder why LSU was in such "horrible" shape. Could it be because of Brady? Surely not, after all he made it to a Final Four.
After the SEC tourney win last year, I admitted that Stans did a good job coaching. That's a fact Jack. This year vs Rider and Richmond not so much.</p>
But let me offer a different perspective.
For every Timmy Bowers/Derrick Zimmerman, there's a Steven Cowherd/Gary Ervin/Jamal Edmundson
For every Jarvis Varnado there's a Vernon Goodridge/Bernard Rimmer/Richard Delk
For every Phil Turner there's a Walter Sharpe/Marcus Campbell/Wesley Morgan
Stansbury is hit-or-miss at best on developing talent. He has no clearly defined track record on that matter.
For every Timmy Bowers/Derrick Zimmerman, there's a Steven Cowherd/Gary Ervin/Jamal Edmundson
For every Jarvis Varnado there's a Vernon Goodridge/Bernard Rimmer/Richard Delk
For every Phil Turner there's a Walter Sharpe/Marcus Campbell/Wesley Morgan
Stansbury is hit-or-miss at best on developing talent. He has no clearly defined track record on that matter.
Xavier seems to be a solid team this year...after losing so many from last season LSU has to be rebuilding...whats the big deal with them losing?
I see you have an agenda against Stansbury as well, naming mostly players who were only here for two years that had serious attitude problems. Had the likes of Sharpe, Ervin, Goodridge, Rimmer, and Delk stayed, they would've inevitably improved just like all the rest of the players that stayed for their entire careers.missouridawg said:
Edmundson was never a bad player in my opinion, nor was Ervin while he was here. Campbell also got a lot better from year one to when he left, and Morgan never had a chance due to injuries.
Why don't you reach a little harder for some players that stayed all four years that didn't improve and become good role players
In SEC play, Brady's record was 74-93, with 5 last place finishes in the West to go along w/ 3 West titles and 4 NCAA appearances. He had 6 years w/ a sub .500 record in league play and two years w/ a .500 record
Stansbury's SEC record is 96-80 with 5 West titles and 6 NCAA appearances, with only 3 losing seasons in SEC play.
It's pretty easy to see that Brady has had much more talent during his stint at LSU, but had less consistent "success" than Stansbury. Pretty obvious that Stansbury has consistently had better teams than Brady, although Brady got "lucky" in two NCAA tourneys, something Stans is still capable of doing.
I don't know about you guys, but I'd much rather be in the thick of things year in, year out than have a good weekend at the right time
Stansbury's SEC record is 96-80 with 5 West titles and 6 NCAA appearances, with only 3 losing seasons in SEC play.
It's pretty easy to see that Brady has had much more talent during his stint at LSU, but had less consistent "success" than Stansbury. Pretty obvious that Stansbury has consistently had better teams than Brady, although Brady got "lucky" in two NCAA tourneys, something Stans is still capable of doing.
I don't know about you guys, but I'd much rather be in the thick of things year in, year out than have a good weekend at the right time
but I have faith in Trent. I'm not sure Brady takes last year's team to a SEC Championship. Trent has won Coach of the Year in three different conferences now (WAC, PAC-10 and SEC)- we'll give him time to rebuild.
so he coached well in wins and poorly in losses? Tell me more. Did we need to score more points to win in the losses?