Norm Peterson

Please tell me Shawn Eichorst won't be under consideration to replace Trev Alberts.

Hopefully, the university got those shirts printed.

Bonus points for the Lat Mayen reference.

As a walk-on?

Look where we are; look where they are. (Hint: they're in the quadrant you don't want to be in, especially facing a team that likes to shoot treys.)

Who is the other local high major?

I remember that. Seemed like the band would play music that would fit the "race" kind of vibe. Egg 'em on a bit. Something like the Lone Ranger theme (William Tell Overture) but I maybe embellishing my memory.

Who on his list is higher than Nebraska at this point?

Last winter, I said the list of portal needs for this year was short and manageable. I said whatever happens to finish the year, given the way the team was playing despite season-ending injuries to two starters, I was firmly on the side of giving Fred another year. And this is coming from someone who was ready to dump him after year 3. After the open practice this past fall, I said I was geeked and that it looked like we'd checked the boxes with our off-season roster moves. Through the first 7 games, we looked solid and impressive, but we really hadn't played anyone yet. And then we got drilled at home by Team Voldemort by almost 30 points and followed it up with a 2nd half collapse at Minnesota, and my Husker Hoops PTSD kicked in. I wasn't sure how well this group would bounce back. We had some new players that we didn't yet know a lot about. The Michigan State win at home could be a fluke. But, when we positively kicked Kansas State's ass in Manhattan, I knew this team was good. I knew we were at least a bubble team from that moment. And then we beat Indiana. And then we beat Purdue. And, while beating Purdue didn't seal a bid, I was sold on the idea that we were good enough to finish the job. And the next day, I started a thread about drivable 1st round venues. I believed what my eyes were telling me. And I said we have so many pieces that each kick in something different of value, and the whole is truly greater than the sum or our individual parts. And then the coaches moved Jamarques Lawrence to the bench, chose to start Brice as our primary ballhandler, and play all three big men on the floor at the same time. And while I was skeptical at first, I'll be damned if it didn't work. This is the best season-long job of coaching I've ever seen from a Husker hoops staff. And we are finally on the cusp of winning that elusive, first ever first-round NCAA tournament game. If this team shoots the way it is capable of shooting, it'll be like the Ohio State game at home: we'll just gradually pull away. And we'll be up 15 with a minute left and Norm will breathe easy. I agree with what @millerhusker said somewhere: Our defense is designed to stop a team like Texas A&M. They have two guards who score nearly half their team's points but neither is very good from deep. We're going to force them to the baseline where we have help and they don't have any good shooters to kick it out to. They have one guy who is a prodigious rebounder at nearly 10 a game. Put a body on him and clean the defensive glass and we're going to win this game. My dudes, that monkey is sprouting wings.

For those who are going, where are you staying? And what were your considerations? Any advice or suggestions?

For a guy who makes north of $3 million/year, these don't seem like very big bonuses. I'd rather pay a guy a smaller amount in annual salary and then really reward him if he hits some target results. $300,000 to win an NCAA championship? You need to add a zero to that figure. But the flip side is don't pay anyone $3 million/year unless tied to results.

OMG same here. Same here. I wish he could have seen this season.

... in the old Coliseum. Joe Cipriano was the coach. Jerry Fort lost a contact lens and they stopped play for probably 5 minutes while people spread out on the floor looking for it. Never forget it. Guys, I feel like I've paid some dues and earned this.

225. All session.

WHAT TIME IS OUR GAME ON FRIDAY?

This is very true. But I was thinking of all the reasons we're going to beat them anyway. So ... 1. They can't shoot for shit. 2. Their AD sucks ass. 3. They're from Texas and everyone knows Texas is the worst. Sportswise. 4. They're in the SEC so everyone hates them.

They have 2 guards who combine to score about half the team's points. They don't have a very deep bench. Six guys over 20 minutes and only 2 other guys in double-figure minutes.

28.4% as a team.

Is the university going to snag some tickets for season ticket holders?

No, no jinxing. My eyes were just telling me something about this team back in December, really. We're going to kick Texas A&M's asses. How do I get a ticket? And what BBQ place should I go to first?

Fair enough.

Why do we care about the rest of that data, though? I mean, we can measure shooting percentages and rebounding, etc. The point of gathering that data, though, and assigning various values to the data, prioritizing some numbers over others (somewhat arbitrarily) is about trying to determine which teams are truly the best in an objective way. But since the vast majority of games end in regulation, does it not skew your data to treat OT like it's part of regulation?

I don't know why I was so pissed at the way the game ended. I'd been saying I would be happy if we beat Indiana and OK if we then lost to Illinois. The extra day of rest would be beneficial. We've seemed to elevate our play coming off a loss most of the season. I said ahead of time I'd be OK with beating Indiana and then losing to Illinois for that very reason. And then, when it happened, I found myself pissed. For probably the same reason Juwan Gary was pissed. That, and we started pressing and forcing things when we damn near cut it down to a 2-possession game. Oh well. I'm going to be happy to watch our name get called this evening. And I'll just be good with whatever.

The day is Saturday, January 13, 1996, and the Nebraska Cornhusker men's basketball team is taking on Kelvin Sampson's Oklahoma Sooners down in Norman. The game ends in a tie. But we can't have ties. So we go to overtime. Overtime ends in a tie (after the officials waive off a Jaron Boone buzzer-beater -- that would have won the game -- because he released it from the short corner behind the plane of the backboard). But we can't have ties. So we go to a second overtime. Second overtime ends in a tie, but Nebraska is losing starters to foul trouble. And we can't have ties. So we go to a third overtime with the Huskers short-handed. And OU blows it open in OT #3 and wins by 17 points, 117-100. Just play better in OT? That's the answer? Thanks for the recommendation. Is that what the metrics are supposed to reflect? Whether a short-handed team was able to "play better" in the third OT? Most games don't go to OT, let alone 3OT. And the likelihood that a team's efficiencies and results will be impaired by foul trouble increases in each extra 5-minute increment by which the game is extended. Seems to me calling that 1996 game a 17-point loss rather than a 1-point loss would skew the data of what the metrics are intended to reflect, which is to reliably rank every team from best to worst. The vast majority of games are decided in regulation. How is including results from OT going to improve your ability to rank the way teams are likely going to play in regulation?

I told everyone that Tominaga jerseys would be popular.