Quotables: MSU Coach Rick Stansbury

Now if only "true bruin fans" would echo his statements

Yeah it's okay to get repeatedly humiliated, because we'll just suddenly start winning soon. Trust me

It's good to be humiliated for a season once in a while. It makes the coach much more aggressive in his recruiting. UCLA basketball needs a bitter taste to counter all those sweet years of victory. Like Coach Rick, Coach Ben will now take recruiting much more seriously and go after the players he needs with a cut-throat attitude. Just a pity that so many gifted athletes don't give a shyte about academics. Oh, well, that's the hand were dealt every year and we just gotta get on with it. Josh Smith is the start to our renaissance. In 2-3 years we'll be competitive again.

I'm so tired of these platitudes about "real fans". Do you have to be a true believer to be a fan? If you went to USC, would you be defending Carroll's recruiting and unsportsmanlike behavior over the past 6 years?

Like USC, I think the fanbase at UCLA can't make the excuse that if the coach is winning, he doesn't have any faults.

We have a very stubborn and egotistical coach. Double-teaming the post in the 2nd half of the 2007 final four game against Florida likely cost us the game. Sticking to man-defense has likely cost at least 2 games this season. The results on the court also show that we are clueless when it comes to attacking zone defenses and have been for 95% of the games we've seen them under Howland's tenure.

His antics remind me of when Mike Martz refused to run the ball with Marshall Faulk because he was challenged to win by passing downfield. He handed the Patriots their first Super Bowl.

At least Lavin had the willingness to adjust. He installed a new offense after losing in the first round to Detroit Mercy. He also switched to a full-time full court press in 2001. He didn't always make the right decisions. Switching from the 1-4 to motion offense when 10 seconds remained was creative but ridiculous. The hockey-style line changes he used in his rotations were used too much.

Howland feeds the press what they want to hear, about playing zone or playing the younger players. He's always given younger guys a shot (Westbrook, Mbah a Moute), so don't think he has reflected and made positive change. He feeds the fans what they want to hear by praising Wooden at every opportunity.

When a team cannot make adjustments, they become vulnerable.

He also hasn't done much in the tourney when his teams don't have a regional advantage.

Don't get me wrong, there's more good than bad. But, thinking that we have the best coach in the country is porous thinking.

Looking back, I think Mark Few would have been a better choice long term. Looking forward, he's probably still available.

Maybe we could talk Coach K into coming over here. Or maybe Roy Williams or Jim Boeheim. Heck, maybe we could invent a time machine and go back 40 years and bring back John Wooden.

Ben Howland is one of the best coaches in the country. We are lucky to have him. All programs have down years. Over the past 2 years we have lost 4 underclassmen to the NBA (3 of which are current starters in the League). Call it bad luck, but it's certainly not bad coaching.

Dean,

I think you've got some very valid points, and your analysis shows that you're not only impassioned, but knowledgeable about the sport. I very distinctly remember the ridiculous sight of five Bruins sitting under the scorers table, waiting for the next whistle. Was it entertaining? Sure. Was it effective? Ehh, not so much.

Still, I challenge you to rethink your analysis considering how difficult it is to actually field a team that can win a national championship. I'm not saying you're wrong, I just think that Howland's system is as effective as any other system THAT CAN BE IMPLEMENTED AT UCLA. Let's be honest here and acknowledge that it's not just an issue of Xs and Os. It's about getting the right players to execute. Even still, one loss in March and it's all for naught. (...or half a dozen losses in November/December because kids can't hedge or hit shots...)

Sometimes I wish Howland's system was easier/looser, but the truth is that we might have a hard time getting those kinds of kids in to UCLA. I might not be in the minority, but I would rather watch UCLA barely miss every year than to watch us become another FSU, cranking out kids with 2nd grade reading levels, in the pursuit of fleeting sports notoriety.

You're right - there's more good than bad. But what does it take to go from good to great? I think it's luck. I say, let's give Ben a chance to get lucky.

Seems to me that Coach Ben sticks to a rigid mindset and demands that every player buys into it. I, for one, don't buy into it. Rigidity in mental process is the first sign of Alzheimer's disease. Coach Norm of the football team is beginning to display the same mental dysfunction. We need coaches who are flexible, creative, and opportunistic as well as nurturing the individual strengths of their team while exploiting the weaknesses of their opposition. Modern American coaches mirror our recent international political, economic, and military strategies. In other words, we are failing badly in the 'modern' world. I don't like it.

Thanks for the comments, Droog.

I also wouldn't sacrifice academics or integrity for winning, but I think it is nothing more than an excuse. Duke and Stanford have drawn up a blueprint for success in an even more stringent academic environment.

My basic point is that Howland has some glaring deficiencies as a coach and his refusal to reflect and address these problems could ultimately lead to his dismissal.

Dean,

Very true. Any coach that doesn't win convincingly, or adapt in an effort to win, will soon be jobless. I guess that goes for any job, but especially so in coaching, which has a distinctly what-have-you-done-for-me-lately attitude.

But hey, I didn't think I'd EVER hear CBH say he was going to implement a zone defense... Progress?