Morrow leaving

[hskr4life]

3 minutes ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

You are making a big assumption that the coaches failed to try to correct him.

 

I've been told quite the opposite, actually.

 

 

100 percent this as well.  Unless you have been at practice every day for the past 2 years, there is no way that you can say the coaches didn't try to correct him.

[huskerbill85]

Miles is bad but it's not just a Miles problem with the athletic program. When schools with much smaller budgets such as Baylor and KSU are doing better than you in both major sports on a consistent basis it's time to evaluate how things are being ran at the top. 

[huskerbaseball13]

26 minutes ago, hskr4life said:

 

I'll give you that... the Ed loss is staggering.  However, with the way that transfers happen these days, everyone should expect it.  Really though who have we "lost?"  An unmotivated Pitchford?  Petteway went Pro.  White... who wanted everything for himself and nothing for the team?  Ed is really the first guy who I was like WOW... that one could hurt the team.  But after hearing what he wanted and what was best for our team.... It doesn't seem as much as a wow.  So to me... those points are moot because we didn't really "lose" anyone to a transfer that was good for the team and Petteway went pro.

 

If it were good for the team one would think we would have done better than the below records.  The bleeding has to stop at some point.  Transfers could actually be used as a positive in a program if it helps to improve upon talent.  Does anybody really think we are going to go out and get a double digit scorer and 8+ rebounder? In no way shape or form do I see losing Ed Morrow as "good" for next year's team.  You can lose a Nick Fuller and even a Horne....but, Morrow is going to be very hard to replace. 

 

16-18(6-12)

12-19(6-12)

Edited March 30, 2017 by huskerbaseball13

[cozrulz]

27 minutes ago, huskerbill85 said:

Miles is bad but it's not just a Miles problem with the athletic program. When schools with much smaller budgets such as Baylor and KSU are doing better than you in both major sports on a consistent basis it's time to evaluate how things are being ran at the top. 

 

Baylor probably isn't a good example...

[Norm Peterson]

Please don't say that sunshine pumpers are saying this is good for the team.  Losing Ed hurts.  He would have made us better next year.  But his loss isn't this insurmountable hit to the program that all the histrionic, hissy-fit throwers are trying to make it out to be.

 

Ed helps the team the most by doing that which he is best at.

 

Unfortunately, he apparently wants a role much different than what he's best at and what would benefit the team the most.

 

It seems almost delusional.

Edited March 30, 2017 by Norm Peterson

[hskr4life]

1 minute ago, Norm Peterson said:

Please don't say that sunshine pumpers are saying this is good for the team.  Losing Ed hurts.  He would have made us better next year.  But his loss isn't this insurmountable hit to the program that all the histrionic, hissy-fit throwers are trying to make it out to be.

 

Ed helps the team the most be doing that which he is best at.

 

Unfortunately, he apparently wants a role much different than what he's best at and what would benefit the team the most.

 

It seems almost delusional.

 

Yep.... goes back to the whole "even the most positive posts for some are negative."

[rr52]

58 minutes ago, LK1 said:

Watson - Taylor

Akenten - please God a great shooter grad transfer - Gill 

McVeigh - Palmer

Copeland - Roby

Jordy - Jacobson

I really, really like the looks of this. However, playing with a 10 to 11 man rotation is tough to pull off. And the reason for that is the reason kids transfer. Kids want to play. All of those guys want to play at least 30 minutes per game (300-330 minutes) yet there is only 200 total minutes available. Glynn deserves 30+, Copeland (if he is as good as his * rating) and Roby should get 25+ apiece and Jordy probably deserves 25+ depending on the match up. That leaves 95 minutes for 6-7 other players or 13-16 minutes per player. That is less than half of what they want and more than likely what they deserve. So there lies the issue, how to please all the players with a finite amount of playing time available. And that doesn't include any new recruits or grad transfers to add to the mix.

I forgot to add the part about the Louisiana Tech (I think) baseball coach talking about "Daddy Ball''. How kids grow up playing and never have to sit on the bench all through youth and high school sports because they are the best at that age so they start and play all the time. Suddenly they get to college and they have to sit on the bench and don't like it. So instead of working to get better they blame somebody else and transfer.

  

Edited March 30, 2017 by rr52

[busticket]

1 hour ago, hhcdimes said:

 

 

There is. However, that's not what Ed necessarily wants either. He wants to be a stretch 4/wing.

 

I, like pretty much everyone, do not see this happening.  I see no wing in no Ed Morrow.

 

And you bring up a good point.  If Ed's heart isn't in being a good college paint player then maybe it is better for him to go.  We have a glut of  better candidates for wings than Ed.  If Ed is here we need him at the 4 (or 5 if you are Tim Miles  )

[Huskerpapa]

Where we now need help...

 

We need a back-up at center.  Jordy and Ed were going to share the center role, now it is just Jordy.

We need a back-up PG.  Arguably right now Isaiah and Evan are the back-ups.

We need a sniper.  A shooter that can consistently fill it up.  Right now, I am not sure if Copeland or Palmer will help.

 

Loved Ed, but if he had come back, he would have shared time with Jordy.  Without Ed, the hope is that Jordy will accelerate his skill sets and will be able to give us a minimum of 25 minutes a game.  But a person backing Jordy up is now a must. 

Edited March 30, 2017 by huskercwg

[swmckewon]

2 hours ago, hskr4life said:

 

I'll give you that... the Ed loss is staggering.  However, with the way that transfers happen these days, everyone should expect it.  Really though who have we "lost?"  An unmotivated Pitchford?  Petteway went Pro.  White... who wanted everything for himself and nothing for the team?  Ed is really the first guy who I was like WOW... that one could hurt the team.  But after hearing what he wanted and what was best for our team.... It doesn't seem as much as a wow.  So to me... those points are moot because we didn't really "lose" anyone to a transfer that was good for the team and Petteway went pro.

 

Andrew White would have been good for the team's W/L record last year. 

 

If you're going to recruit the kinds of kids who land prominently in recruiting ratings, better be prepared for their goals and aspirations - especially if you're not going to the NCAA Tournament with any regularity. 

[Ron Mexico]

16 hours ago, nustudent said:

 

I certainly don't consider people a success just because their predecessor was a turd and the current performance is mediocre and not bad 

 

No answer.

[Handy Johnson]

Forget the Box Score numbers, this kid brought attitude, guts, and muscle to a team that lacks all of the above. Tim's job just got A LOT harder...

[Ron Mexico]

15 hours ago, huskerbaseball13 said:

I have to laugh. I for one don't give a damn about Eichorst. But some act like he's the devil because he had the nerve to fire a football coach hired by Osborne. People bring up Eichorst's hires to bash him and in the same breath praise Osborne. Osborne made lackluster hires. For the life of me, I don't know why some can't admit that. And as you can see...it really irks sensitive posters like Norm. Keeping Miles around after next year because Eichorst is the AD should not be a thing. If it is, the athletic department will be in shambles soon. 

Respect is earned, and TO deserves every bit of that respect. Why is TO given a pass by fans like me, because he's earned it. Eichorst has not earned any respect and thus he gets none from me. TO rescued Nebraska football, brought the budget back into line, and got us into the BIG. Without TO we would still be in the BIG 12 and broke and no Harvey Perlman had no hand in any of that happening. The football coach TO hired was a consistent winner, and the basketball coach he hired got us to our first NCAA tournament in more than 15+ years, and baseball was a disaster which has been brought back to respectability. We have very different ideas of what lackluster means. What irks sensitive posters like me is when overly entitled fans like yourself take every opportunity to bash a living a legend in the world of college athletics. What really bothers me even more is that there are far more like you in our fan base. You should take Norm's advice.

 

[Dead Dog Alley]

7 minutes ago, Ron Mexico said:

Respect is earned, and TO deserves every bit of that respect. Why is TO given a pass by fans like me, because he's earned it. Eichorst has not earned any respect and thus he gets none from me. TO rescued Nebraska football, brought the budget back into line, and got us into the BIG. Without TO we would still be in the BIG 12 and broke and no Harvey Perlman had no hand in any of that happening. The football coach TO hired was a consistent winner, and the basketball coach he hired got us to our first NCAA tournament in more than 15+ years, and baseball was a disaster which has been brought back to respectability. We have very different ideas of what lackluster means. What irks sensitive posters like me is when overly entitled fans like yourself take every opportunity to bash a living a legend in the world of college athletics. What really bothers me even more is that there are far more like you in our fan base. You should take Norm's advice.

 

[Dead Dog Alley]

Enough already.

[Norm Peterson]

30 minutes ago, Dead Dog Alley said:

Enough already.

 

I didn't bring it up; Ron didn't bring it up; someone else brought it up.  Perhaps you could have told them "enough already."

 

But I'm still mystified by the way some people want to interject the subject of an AD who retired years ago into a discussion about a player leaving who wasn't even here yet when that last AD stepped down.

 

I always figured the hiring of coaches was an inexact science.  If it was easy, Notre Dame would win the national championship in football every year.  And Texas would never lose to TCU.  So, I did a little digging and crunched some numbers to try to determine whether TO was as much of an abject failure in hiring coaches as some seem to continue to try to claim. 

 

Here's the tale of the tape:

 

Top 5 "major" sports at NU = football, volleyball, m/w basketball, baseball

 

Eichorst, 2 hires:

 

Riley win% = 57.7; predecessor last 5 season win% = 71.2; net change = -13.5

 

Williams win% = 24.1; predecessor last 5 season win% = 69.9; net change = -45.8

 

TO, 3 hires:

Pelini win% = 71.0; predecessor 4 season win% = 55.1; net change = +15.9

Miles win% = 46.6; predecessor last 5 season win% = 52.8; net change = -6.2

Erstad win% = 59.3; predecessor last 5 season win% = 55.4; net change = +3.9

Peterson, 3 hires:

Callahan win% = 52.9; predecessor last 5 season win% = 76.6; net change = -23.7

Sadler win% = 53.2; predecessor last 5 season win% = .500; net change = +3.2

Anderson win % = 63.0; predecessor last 5 season win% = 69.5; net change = -6.5

 

Looks like a bad year for the Eichorst hires, huh?  And two out of three of TO's major hires were improvements over their predecessors.

So, can we just leave some past AD out of the discussion of the current condition of the basketball program?

Like Dead Dog said, "enough already."  Quit beating your dead horse.

[HB]

10 hours ago, aphilso1 said:

 

Do you manage, mentor, or coach anyone?  If your employee/mentee tells you that they want to improve on a specific skill (wing play) in order to achieve a specific goal (play professionally), and you see them consistently miss opportunities to improve that skill (dunk rather than shoot in warmups) and you fail to correct them, then are you a good manager/mentee/coach?

 

Actually, I'm your Huckleberry.

 

 I do the first two every day.  And ya know what, some won't be managed, mentored, or coached.  And way more the last 10-15 years than before that.   You try everything--"correcting" them, encouraging them, establishing consequences, rewarding.  Believe me, throwing the entire tool box to help someone improve.  But often that person doesn't want any part of it.  They want results and validation.  And they're usually getting validation from a parent or someone else, whether they've earned it or not.  Failing to reach someone despite putting resources and effort into it and then having someone leave doesn't mean you're a bad manager, mentor or coach.  And I'm talking today's world, not necessarily the specific topic at hand. 

Edited March 31, 2017 by HB

[Bugeaters1]

Enough already.

I think that you have posted this on the wrong guy.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[huskerbaseball13]

20 minutes ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

I didn't bring it up; Ron didn't bring it up; someone else brought it up.  Perhaps you could have told them "enough already."

 

But I'm still mystified by the way some people want to interject the subject of an AD who retired years ago into a discussion about a player leaving who wasn't even here yet when that last AD stepped down.

 

I always figured the hiring of coaches was an inexact science.  If it was easy, Notre Dame would win the national championship in football every year.  And Texas would never lose to TCU.  So, I did a little digging and crunched some numbers to try to determine whether TO was as much of an abject failure in hiring coaches as some seem to continue to try to claim. 

 

Here's the tale of the tape:

 

Top 5 "major" sports at NU = football, volleyball, m/w basketball, baseball

 

Eichorst, 2 hires:

 

Riley win% = 57.7; predecessor last 5 season win% = 71.2; net change = -13.5

 

Williams win% = 24.1; predecessor last 5 season win% = 69.9; net change = -45.8

 

TO, 3 hires:

Pelini win% = 71.0; predecessor 4 season win% = 55.1; net change = +15.9

Miles win% = 46.6; predecessor last 5 season win% = 52.8; net change = -6.2

Erstad win% = 59.3; predecessor last 5 season win% = 55.4; net change = +3.9

Peterson, 3 hires:

Callahan win% = 52.9; predecessor last 5 season win% = 76.6; net change = -23.7

Sadler win% = 53.2; predecessor last 5 season win% = .500; net change = +3.2

Anderson win % = 63.0; predecessor last 5 season win% = 69.5; net change = -6.5

 

Looks like a bad year for the Eichorst hires, huh?  And two out of three of TO's major hires were improvements over their predecessors.

So, can we just leave some past AD out of the discussion of the current condition of the basketball program?

Like Dead Dog said, "enough already."  Quit beating your dead horse.

 

I simply pointed out that Miles was a Osborne hire because some who are quick to label someone like Amy Williams a failed hire after one year also give Osborne a pass for his failed hires. Yet, Eichorst is the devil.  Again, maybe he is a jerk and a terrible AD. The hypocrisy is funny to me.

 

Larranaga win% = 68; predecessor 5 season win% = 57; net change = +11

[rvl]

27 minutes ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

I didn't bring it up; Ron didn't bring it up; someone else brought it up.  Perhaps you could have told them "enough already."

 

But I'm still mystified by the way some people want to interject the subject of an AD who retired years ago into a discussion about a player leaving who wasn't even here yet when that last AD stepped down.

 

I always figured the hiring of coaches was an inexact science.  If it was easy, Notre Dame would win the national championship in football every year.  And Texas would never lose to TCU.  So, I did a little digging and crunched some numbers to try to determine whether TO was as much of an abject failure in hiring coaches as some seem to continue to try to claim. 

 

Here's the tale of the tape:

 

Top 5 "major" sports at NU = football, volleyball, m/w basketball, baseball

 

Eichorst, 2 hires:

 

Riley win% = 57.7; predecessor last 5 season win% = 71.2; net change = -13.5

 

Williams win% = 24.1; predecessor last 5 season win% = 69.9; net change = -45.8

 

TO, 3 hires:

Pelini win% = 71.0; predecessor 4 season win% = 55.1; net change = +15.9

Miles win% = 46.6; predecessor last 5 season win% = 52.8; net change = -6.2

Erstad win% = 59.3; predecessor last 5 season win% = 55.4; net change = +3.9

Peterson, 3 hires:

Callahan win% = 52.9; predecessor last 5 season win% = 76.6; net change = -23.7

Sadler win% = 53.2; predecessor last 5 season win% = .500; net change = +3.2

Anderson win % = 63.0; predecessor last 5 season win% = 69.5; net change = -6.5

 

Looks like a bad year for the Eichorst hires, huh?  And two out of three of TO's major hires were improvements over their predecessors.

So, can we just leave some past AD out of the discussion of the current condition of the basketball program?

Like Dead Dog said, "enough already."  Quit beating your dead horse.

How dare you present some facts.  It's concerning to me that I'm on the fence as to who the better ad is between eichorst and pederson.

[Norm Peterson]

3 minutes ago, rvl said:

How dare you present some facts.  It's concerning to me that I'm on the fence as to who the better ad is between eichorst and pederson.

 

OK, that there's funny, I don't care who you are.

[HB]

4 minutes ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

OK, that there's funny, I don't care who you are.

 

Funny?   Hell, that's where I'm living.  Dudes are twins.  

[Marv]

 
I simply pointed out that Miles was a Osborne hire because some who are quick to label someone like Amy Williams a failed hire after one year also give Osborne a pass for his failed hires. Yet, Eichorst is the devil.  Again, maybe he is a jerk and a terrible AD. The hypocrisy is funny to me.
 

Larranaga win% = 68; predecessor 5 season win% = 57; net change = +11

I'm not even sure who's side this is supporting at this point, but Frank Martin's recent success has changed the tone of how much fans can celebrate Eichorst's great Larranaga hire.

Martin (a Final 4 coach) was in the bag at Miami. He was from the area and was done with KSU and they pulled a fast one and went with Larranaga instead of Martin. Just something to consider before celebrating SE's Larranaga hire.

Not siding with anyone, just chiming in on that one thought.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[The Polish Rifle]

Judging Eichorst when neither of his hires have had more than full two seasons is outrageous. Just like judging a coaches success after two seasons is down right stupid. That goes for any coach or AD, not just saying that to protect SE. 

 

Back to the topic at hand - what are the odds Copeland gets to play the full season next year? I think that is huge now. 

[huskerbaseball13]

2 minutes ago, Marv said:

I'm not even sure who's side this is supporting at this point, but Frank Martin's recent success has changed the tone of how much fans can celebrate Eichorst's great Larranaga hire.

Martin (a Final 4 coach) was in the bag at Miami. He was from the area and was done with KSU and they pulled a fast one and went with Larranaga instead of Martin. Just something to consider before celebrating SE's Larranaga hire.

Not siding with anyone, just chiming in on that one thought.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 

 

I don't even know if there is a side.  I'm not trying to argue that Eichorst>>>Osborne.  Eichorst could leave tomorrow and it would do nothing for me.  My original point was I'd rather risk Eichorst making the hire than remain on the current course if it comes down to it.