Dean Smith

It was clear he was't adding anything? If that's what you saw I have to say you don't really get this basketball thing do you?

I think your are missing other things that make a coach. The most important is Big Picture, Vision, whatever you want to call it. What I mean by that is what is your team trying to do year after year. Many people will refer to this as knowing your x's and o's. You talk about player development which is the technical, but you also have to have an understanding of what it is you want to accomplish tactically. And how you teach your technical skills need to fit into the overall tactical vision. You have to have a cohesive offensive and defensive package. There are "styles" of offense and defense that don't fit together or don't fit together as well as others. The need to be fundamentally and structurally sound. I've seen coaches run some things that have a fundamental flaw that will always have a certain weakness or be susceptible to particular countermeasures. Another thing you missed that I think Miles is good at is game planning. How are you going to take away or reduce the effects of the team's or individual players; strengths. They don't always work but I have seen other teams try to copy his game plan at times. Lots of people tried to play Purdue the way we did. One of the biggest underestimated "must haves" of a successful coach has to be player relations. At this level you also have to be able to create positive relations with the administration and with the public. Then there are by definition the undefinable intangibles. I could go on but I just think that you oversimplified the measurements of what it takes to be a good coach.

I thought someone would have already posted this. Sorry if I missed and and this is redundant. http://www.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/tai-webster-named-second-team-all-big-ten-by-media/article_7fc9f8ea-02ba-11e7-a38a-07fc10731f53.html

http://www.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/tai-webster-named-second-team-all-big-ten-by-media/article_7fc9f8ea-02ba-11e7-a38a-07fc10731f53.html

See I never bought that. He did care but I always felt mostly about his success. But what do I know?

Idk - Trotter made it sound like they really wanted to play together but Moe was out and there wasn't anywhere else they all could have gone together.

All I have is Kerry Trotter's word (and I'm sure he would never remember me so this isn't holding up in a court of law), but this is what he told me at one of Tom Brosnihan's practices. He said that he (Marquette), Vic Lazzaretti (Marquette & Loyola Marymount), Dave Hoppen, Bill Jackman, and Ron Kellogg all played on the first Bison team together and agreed to all play together at Creighton and Cedric Hunter promised to follow Kellogg the next year if Creighton had given the head coaching job to Broz. Most of them did not want to play for Moe and they assumed Broz would get the job when Apke moved to Colorado. They weren't happy when Reed got the job which is at least part of the reason Alex Stivrins left as well. Trotter "thought" Alex would have stayed and played for Broz. Now I know this is the "wrong" Nebraska team but boy would have that changed the basketball landscape around here. And how did Nebraska have so many D-1 players back then? Five in one year and that would have been 7 all together in four years and I'm sure I'm missing someone just because I always do.

For people to infer that the trip to the NCAA's was due to Smith's coaching, I think you have mistaken correlation with causation.

Not ignoring you. Just find it hard to come read the board at all after the last two. Nebraksa keeps what is traditionally the baseline runner as the basket protector and they rotate around him. GT would keep his big man (Mutombo/Morning) in the center and all of the other four rotates around him. You could start on the point and after a couple rotations, be the baseline runner. I saw Thompson present at a Nike clinic. Most everyone else came alone while a few brought one assistant. John brought his whole staff and his wife. He couldn't get the projector to work so he had his coaches (Ed Spriggs was one If you're old enough to remember him), come up on stage and show the rotations. The stage wasn't big enough so his coaches were jumping off and back onto the stage during rotations. These guys would not qualify as young any more. Not only did none of them complain, they all referred to him only as "sir." Most were former players and you could feel the respect. And when his tiny wife walked in and gave everyone of them a hug you could feel the love. Some derogatorily referred to it as hoya paranoia, but you could see they were family. I have my clinic notes somewhere in the house if you want more specifics

If you look back, it is not exactly but very similar to what the first John Thompson ran when he was at Georgetown.

That's only true if the teams are very very close in ability or if injuries are involved. If a team wins two that usually means they are the better team and they win the third as well. In this case both of my caveats are true and I would like our chances.

Nothing earth shattering here but I walked past him at the Creighton/Georgetown game and he is all of 6'9 if not taller.

Yes he has no explosiveness but boy I hope he's raw and we are not looking at the finished product. Some play by play? said he predicted Jordy would be really good before he was done because he has the size and most importantly, he wants to be good and is willing to work to be good. Great compliment. Before he is done he will be more explosive, wil not always have to turn right shoulder, will consistently catch the ball and start finishing at a much higher rate. I can see guys looking at him open in the post (one thing he does do fairly well now is seal), and you can see them thinking, "What are the odds something good will happen if I throw him the ball? And then they pass it somewhere else. On the the other hand I've seen Glynn throw him lobs and Tai threw him a full court pass. As it's happening I'm thinking, "He's not going to catch that." Now he didn't catch either but it's a good sign that his teammates have some trust in him and as he developes, that trust will grow.

It's not a travel until the pivot foot comes back down, making that a legal move. It's the same step through you see in the post, just farther out on the floor. You get the step and a half from anywhere on the court.

The traveling rule does not apply out of bounds. You cannot "run" like you can after a made basket and you have limited movement, you have to stay in roughly the area they hand you the ball, but you do not have a pivot foot and what he did was legal.

The overtime is considered an extension of the second half. That's why you continue with the free throw count, etc. so yes, all of the OT is open to review.

The write up is written at a fan level and doesn't get into too many technical details. It doesn't mention who guards in the corner. It does talk about cover downs but not it's basic post defense principles. I'm sure Miles got a much more detailed report from Xavier. ?

It hard to tell from this angle but it looks like his shoulders are more back. You can see the body turn with toes to 10 o'clock and his shooting shoulder squared right to the basket. The farther out the shot, the more lack of arch will get you.

He was sat down twice immediately after defensive lapses and if I remember correctly, he did not see the floor again after giving up a four point play. Btw - I agree with those decisions.

The pack line is an overused and often misused term. It is something people now use to describe any sagging M-4-M but it is a specific defense with specific rules for post play, rotation and recovery that was "created" by Dick Bennett at Wisconsin and now brought to prominence by his son at Virginia. We are still playing the packline.

Ed, on the baseline, stayed at the basket allowing Jacobson to play up to and slightly beyond the FT line in the middle. Maryland didn't look to get it there a lot but it looked like our wings went all the way out to the baseline corner which is usually the baseline runner's responsibility. They did not look to trap but tried to get into the passing lanes which confused Maryland. At times they didn't seem to know where to go with the ball. With our length and sagging into the passing lanes, it took away the traditional skip passes that you use to attack a 1-3-1 with. I know it is a completely different level but if anyone ever saw Syracuse (that's the town in Nebraska not the university in New York) when they were on their state tourney runs, that is the way they played the 1-3-1. This isn't something you can play the majority of a game, especially against good perimeter shooting teams but it's was a great offspeed pitch that got us over the finish line. I would continue to use it sparingly as the year goes on in conjunction with the other zone they have played this year. If nothing else, its something that takes up opponents practice time to prepare for us.

And we are still playing the pack line defense making the other team (most of the time) take tough shots. We made Melo look below average in the last couple of minutes when he tried to take the game over with drives.

You don't have to trap out of a 1-3-1. The middle of the zone has more to cover than the middle of a 2-3 and on-ball defense is always lmportant. Especially vs. 1-3-1 as one common method of attack is dribbling into the seams between the point and wing. Another weakness of that defense is you have long rotations so it is succeptable to the three just with quick ball movement. You can beat a 1-3-1 by setting picks. You can seal the weakside wing down for a three or seal up on rotation for the lob to the hoop. You can pick the baseline runner on a reversal and they then have no one to cover the corner once reversed. Pass to the corner drawing the baseline runner out and pick the middle of the zone with one post as the other gets to the basket with no one left to guard them. Pick the the top of the defense and dibble into the heart. Calapari does that a lot with a baseline runner. The old Bad Boys from Detroit had a secondary break that had four picks on that zone right off the go. I reallze the updated coach's axiom of "whoever holds the whiteboard marker last wins" fits here, but there's a reason you don't see a lot of teams at this level run the 1-3-1 as their primary defense. It has a lot of parts that can be exploited. It can can be a good defense as a change up if you have the personnel. It is easy to trap out of since who the trappers, anticipators and basket protector become really obvious. As I stated before, I preferred running a 3-2 that gives you better three-point coverage and I think our personnel fits that better.

I'm not sure how you would run the rotations on your 1-3-1 but you usually don't want one of your best rebounders running to the corner. Traditionally, you want the length on the wings to get in passing lanes and for rebounding when they are on the weak side. 1-3-1 when you have Jordy in the middle and 3-2 when he's not. You get much better 3-point defending out of a 3-2 when all 5 players guard out to the line. You get better coverage and shorter rotations to get out there.

Do me a favor and give me a quick run down on the schematics of the current offense as you see it. They've been running when available all year.