Shut Up Sipple! - Why Fred Should have at least 5 years

[BannedAccount]

3 hours ago, uneblinstu said:

If Fred stays, I don't think it flips as much as some think. I legitimately have no idea what Trev's going to do and I'm not going to make an argument one way or the other. If this incoming class fits together better and he can find a pg in the portal, you should know whether or not it'll be worth staying the course by the end of next season. 

 

I am intrigued by what is in that class and would like to see them play here, but if Trev thinks Fred's not the guy, that shouldn't factor into his decision. 

Agreed on the last part.  I think people worry too much about losing recruits and not the big picture.

[tbowman]

21 hours ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

Nee's first team at Nebraska finished with 21 wins and a 3rd place finish in the NIT. His 2nd season, they won 14; the 3rd year they won 17.

 

Fred Hoiberg's first three years should be so atrocious.

Fair point. But I remember those seasons. Danny finished Year 4 at 10-18 and the fan base wanted his head. Then in Year 5, with many of the same players that lost 18 games, Nebraska won 26 games and fielded the best team in my lifetime. 

 

Danny's teams ran up and down the floor. It was often undisciplined and ugly. For the first few years it didn't work real well. And then it did. 

 

I believe Fred is on the same path. He should receive minimum 5 years to implement his system and recruit to his system. 

[tbowman]

20 hours ago, coughunter said:

There is a difference between bringing in talent based off rankings, and talent that fits your system that you can develop.  So far we've seen 3 roster flips with anfourth one coming and yet to have a pg or suitable big man for this conference.  You can say wait till next year and then what?  Wait 3-4 more years hoping they stay and develop where it shows progress?  Hard sell for me to think it will happen based on what has happened thus far.

 

I continue to maintain Year 1 was not on Fred. He did not have time or opportunity to field a solid recruiting class. I do not believe it's possible to reach any kind of certain conclusions based on 2 years of recruiting and on-court product. 

[tbowman]

17 hours ago, coughunter said:

Agreed on the last part.  I think people worry too much about losing recruits and not the big picture.

 

I'm not concerned about losing recruits. Based on Fred's body of work prior to Nebraska, I'm worried about losing someone who could become the most successful coach Nebraska has ever hired before even giving him a chance to succeed. 

[tbowman]

On 2/10/2022 at 11:10 AM, Huskerpapa said:

Tbowman, let's say I agree with you & further let's assume my title is AD. Would you require any changes in either assistant coaches or schematics as we finish this season and plan for next season? 

 

That's an impossible question. I don't know. 

 

In general, I would not want to mandate any significant changes on Fred after only 2 seasons (year 1 is a lost season that was out of his control). 

 

I would want to talk with Fred at the end of the season. If he's good at his job (as I believe he is), he will be able to articulate both the problems faced this season and a plan going forward. If recruiting also remains strong, I would give him another year or two. 

 

I'm not a fan of everything I see on the court. I am not a Doc fan. I dislike that NU gives up a zillion wide-open 3 pointers every game. But if I'm honest with myself, it's easy to see in almost every game they don't quite have the athletes to compete yet. They kind of have to pack the paint because they can't defend the paint 1-on-1. 

 

Without knowing details, I am consistent in my belief Fred should get two more seasons to implement his system, recruit players to that system and coach the players within that system. 

 

Is there room within that statement for some modest changes? Probably. If it's true only 1 assistant coach is recruiting, maybe that should change. Maybe they should all recruit? I don't know. I don't know what is commonly done in most programs these days. 

 

 

[busticket]

The one thing I would say is that the first season (in this case the “lost season”) is your baseline as the coach.  Being a lost season, improvement in year 2 and 3 should be reasonably attainable because year 1 is basically accepted as having no chance for success.

 

This is where most people are upset.  The lack of growth above the results of a lost season.  If year 2 and 3 look similar to the “lost season”, there are serious issues with what you are doing as the head coach.  
 

Hopefully we turn the corner and this is a non-issue.  I would love to see us perform similarly to Fred’s ISU teams.

[Norm Peterson]

2 hours ago, tbowman said:

Fair point. But I remember those seasons. Danny finished Year 4 at 10-18 and the fan base wanted his head. Then in Year 5, with many of the same players that lost 18 games, Nebraska won 26 games and fielded the best team in my lifetime. 

 

Whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa.

 

Danny's 10-18 team lacked ...

 

• Tony Farmer (sat out as a transfer the 10-18 season; Big 8 all-tournament team the following year) who averaged 12.4 ppg and 7.4 bds in 90-91
• Eric Piatkowski (sat out as a redshirt the 10-18 season) 10.9 ppg, 3.7 bds, 2.0 assists in 90-91
• Beau Reid (sat out injured the 10-18 season) 9.9 ppg, 4.6 bds, 3.8 assists in 90-91
• Also lacked Jose Ramos and Bruce Chubick who were rotation players.

 

That's 3 of our top 6 scorers, 3 of our top 5 rebounders, and our top assists guy who played the 26-8 season but sat out the 10-18 season.

 

You CANNOT say that it was basically the same players, which you didn't exactly say but you certainly implied.

 

It was NOT the same players. There were critical, critical differences. And Danny's first 3 teams were nowhere near atrocious.

 

[tbowman]

37 minutes ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

Whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa.

 

Danny's 10-18 team lacked ...

 

• Tony Farmer (sat out as a transfer the 10-18 season; Big 8 all-tournament team the following year) who averaged 12.4 ppg and 7.4 bds in 90-91
• Eric Piatkowski (sat out as a redshirt the 10-18 season) 10.9 ppg, 3.7 bds, 2.0 assists in 90-91
• Beau Reid (sat out injured the 10-18 season) 9.9 ppg, 4.6 bds, 3.8 assists in 90-91
• Also lacked Jose Ramos and Bruce Chubick who were rotation players.

 

That's 3 of our top 6 scorers, 3 of our top 5 rebounders, and our top assists guy who played the 26-8 season but sat out the 10-18 season.

 

You CANNOT say that it was basically the same players, which you didn't exactly say but you certainly implied.

 

It was NOT the same players. There were critical, critical differences. And Danny's first 3 teams were nowhere near atrocious.

 

 

Farmer, Piatkowski, and Reid were all on the team during year 4. I was accurate in stating it was mostly that same team that turned everything around the following year. 

 

Give Fred 2 more seasons to recruit and develop his guys. There are a few players on this current team who could be really, really good in a year or two. Not to mention new players coming in. 

[aphilso1]

4 minutes ago, tbowman said:

 

Farmer, Piatkowski, and Reid were all on the team during year 4. I was accurate in stating it was mostly that same team that turned everything around the following year. 

 

Give Fred 2 more seasons to recruit and develop his guys. There are a few players on this current team who could be really, really good in a year or two. Not to mention new players coming in. 

 

We're in Year 3.  If Fred could "develop his guys" rather than chase them off every year, he'd have a team full of experienced upperclassmen right now.

[HB]

1 hour ago, tbowman said:

 

Farmer, Piatkowski, and Reid were all on the team during year 4. I was accurate in stating it was mostly that same team that turned everything around the following year. 

 

Give Fred 2 more seasons to recruit and develop his guys. There are a few players on this current team who could be really, really good in a year or two. Not to mention new players coming in. 

I have no problem with your opinions on Fred even though I don't share them.   I mean, go for it, and good luck star gazing on the current players who won't be leaving being really really good as well as the recruits.    But you were clearly NOT accurate in stating it was "mostly the same team" that turned it around the following year.  Just flat out wrong on that. 

[tbowman]

29 minutes ago, HB said:

I have no problem with your opinions on Fred even though I don't share them.   I mean, go for it, and good luck star gazing on the current players who won't be leaving being really really good as well as the recruits.    But you were clearly NOT accurate in stating it was "mostly the same team" that turned it around the following year.  Just flat out wrong on that. 

 

Nope. Nearly all of those guys were on the team. 

Edited February 11, 2022 by tbowman

[hugh42]

48 minutes ago, aphilso1 said:

 

We're in Year 3.  If Fred could "develop his guys" rather than chase them off every year, he'd have a team full of experienced upperclassmen right now.

 

There is no doubt that we shouldn't be where we are in year 3 under Fred, but I'm curious who those upperclassmen would be? In part due to the extra covid year, we could have the following players still here:

 

Akol Arop

Kevin Cross

Cam Mack

Shamiel Stevenson

Dachon Burke

Samari Curtis

Jervay Green

Yvan Ouedraogo

Thor Thorbjarnarson

Delano Banton

Teddy Allen

Elijah Wood

 

Of this group, the biggest loss IMO was Banton who left on his own. Curtis did as well. Some sent themselves packing. Cross is the one player I wish we would have kept as his game has developed and I think he would have fit in well with this team. Who else would have been better fits than who we currently have on the roster?

[cornfed24-7]

1 minute ago, tbowman said:

 

Nope. All of those guys were on the team. 

[CrazyforNUHOOPS]

28 minutes ago, tbowman said:

 

Nope. Nearly all of those guys were on the team. 

You’re playing pretty fast and loose with “on the team”.  Please point to some stat lines (not Beau Reid) for them from the ‘89-‘90 season. 

[HB]

31 minutes ago, CrazyforNUHOOPS said:

You’re playing pretty fast and loose with “on the team”.  Please point to some stat lines (not Beau Reid) for them from the ‘89-‘90 season. 

He’s just being stubborn now and parsing the English language.  Really decreases any credibility.  

[BannedAccount]

7 hours ago, tbowman said:

 

I'm not concerned about losing recruits. Based on Fred's body of work prior to Nebraska, I'm worried about losing someone who could become the most successful coach Nebraska has ever hired before even giving him a chance to succeed. 

Based on what though?  Its year 3...

[hhcmatt]

I guess this thread still might be trying to find rock bottom

[Ron Mexico]

8 hours ago, tbowman said:

Fair point. But I remember those seasons. Danny finished Year 4 at 10-18 and the fan base wanted his head. Then in Year 5, with many of the same players that lost 18 games, Nebraska won 26 games and fielded the best team in my lifetime. 

 

Danny's teams ran up and down the floor. It was often undisciplined and ugly. For the first few years it didn't work real well. And then it did. 

 

I believe Fred is on the same path. He should receive minimum 5 years to implement his system and recruit to his system. 

Who wanted his head? It was no secret that Danny was stockpiling players.

My freshman year was 1990/91 and on campus there was a huge buzz about the upcoming season. You had to get to games at least an hour early to get good student seats for games. If you came to late you had go to the bleacher seats or wherever they sent those who arrived late. The student section essentially surrounded the court and you couldn't sit down because we where packed in there so tightly.

 

The comparison you are trying to make is not a good one. I'm not going to debate the merits of whether FH should stay or go with you. In year 3 I honestly don't blame you for not wanting the trigger pulled. Bottom line is FH can do a lot to help himself by winning a few games to finish out the season. Most here, I think, would prefer to keep him, if there was anything to grasp onto.

[Handy Johnson]

7 hours ago, tbowman said:

 

Farmer, Piatkowski, and Reid were all on the team during year 4. I was accurate in stating it was mostly that same team that turned everything around the following year. 

 

Give Fred 2 more seasons to recruit and develop his guys. There are a few players on this current team who could be really, really good in a year or two. Not to mention new players coming in. 

Farmer & Piatkowski both played in the NBA, I don’t see anyone like that waiting in the wings but hopefully I’m wrong…

[royalfan]

Just a couple things to keep in mind from sort of a devil's advocate perspective an a general perspective

 

.  1.  The first year almost should not count towards his record.  It was an unmitigated disaster he inherited and would have been an unmitigated disaster no matter who was coaching.  The discouraging part for me is that the first bunch arguable played harder than any team since.  

 

2.  I am not sure Matt A. isn't ok here, but things need to change.  If he is the only guy evaluating the talent and recruiting then obviously something needs changed.  He seems to land guys, but we need him to be recruiting and landing guys that actually can play.  If they are simply looking at stars for the most part, and just getting the best talent available, that can easily be a flawed approach.  You don't end up with anyone wanting to do the dirty work, among other major problems.  

 

3.  I am not sure it will ever work for Fred here as you cannot play positionless basketball in this league.  It is the exact wrong league for it.  You end up giving up too many shots on defense that go against what the analytics suggest you want to give up.  Fred likes his offensive analytics which I love, but at what expense?  Giving up an even worse ratio at the other end?  You cannot always have a choice to either give up easy ones at the rim or double and give up wide open threes.  Those are the exact shots we want, but unfortunately the exact shots we give up way more of than we get. 

[huskerbill85]

Huge IF and definitely not probable but if last game was an indication of somethings clicking with our talented players the next 5 games are winnable not saying we will win them all but if we can get some consistency we saw last game were going to see alot of people's opinions change and that would be a great thing.

[NUdiehard]

I know this will sound like excuses, but one other factor I think Trev should take into account is how much the Covid "extra year" affected the strength of teams in the B1G this year.  Most believe the B1G is a bit down this year.  I disagree.  The top may not fill up the national top 10, but top to bottom this league is a beast  Northwestern is a really good team.  I know, I watched them with my own eyes.  Michigan is really good (noticed they beat Purdue by 24 points the other day).  Every team I have watched this year (sans maybe Minnesota) looked really solid to me.  I especially realized this when I watched NU play Minnesota, who is a good but not great team, and how much different it was than all the other teams we have played so far in the B1G. 

 

Other teams were able to retain some very, very good 5th year seniors because of the extra year.  Think of Wisconsin and Brad Davison.  He torched us.  Had it not been for Covid, he wouldn't have been eligible.  Many teams have this advantage and having 5th or 6th year players is a huge, huge advatage.

 

In contrast, the only "covid" eligible players on NU are Webster and Lakes (who has been injured and never really played).  Now, we could blame Fred for this, but not really.  Fred inherited a mess and had to turn over the entire roster in year 1.  That is why many argue year 1 should not count.  But that turnover did not allow for these 5th and 6th year players to be on the roster this year unlike all of our B1G foes.  

 

This is where it gets tricky comparing Fred's record this year to other NU coaches in the past.  I just don't think we've ever seen a time when every team in the conference is so good/solid.  Plus, the B1G now has 20 conference games, so less chance to beat up on cupcakes (Doc's speciality).  

 

And one more thing.  And I know y'all are going to scream "excuses excuses", but I can't remember a year like this when the other teams seemed to be so healthy.  NU has had two pretty significant injuries in Trey and Wilhelm.  It seems like most of the teams we have played this year are at full or close to full strength.  I previous years, it seemed other teams always had injuries of major players and that allowed for an upset or two to happen.  Heck, a few years ago Miles NU team played Creighton when Creighton had 4 starters injured--and still lost!  Not this year.  Most every team we have played had most or all of their best players while NU did not have Trey and Wilhelm for most of the year.  Does anyone think we don't beat NC State if we have Trey?  Maybe others.  

 

In short, my position is that year 1 is a throw out year.  Year 2 was a mess because of Covid (no fans, players sitting out, the entire team could not play for 3 full weeks and then had to cram a bunch of games in, etc).  And now, in year 3, we are still under unique circumstances due to Covid that frankly, IMO, benefit most of the other teams much more than NU just do to the timing of when Fred was hired.  Again, call it an excuse.  But that is just what I see and that will go away next year because all those "extra year" players will be gone and it will go back to even for everyone.  

Edited February 12, 2022 by NUdiehard

[HB]

31 minutes ago, NUdiehard said:

 

 

In short, my position is that year 1 is a throw out year.  Year 2 was a mess because of Covid (no fans, players sitting out, the entire team could not play for 3 full weeks and then had to cram a bunch of games in, etc).  And now, in year 3, we are still under unique circumstances due to Covid that frankly, IMO, benefit most of the other teams much more than NU just do to the timing of when Fred was hired.  Again, call it an excuse.  But that is just what I see and that will go away next year because all those "extra year" players will be gone and it will go back to even for everyone.  

Ok, I’ll call it an excuse.   And overthinking 101.  Hyper-justification.  
 

If Fred does get another year, I hope he doesn’t buy into the above drivel, but instead analyzes, understands and acknowledges  the many mistakes that have been made since he arrived, and makes significant changes.  

[OmahaHusker]

44 minutes ago, NUdiehard said:

I know this will sound like excuses, but one other factor I think Trev should take into account is how much the Covid "extra year" affected the strength of teams in the B1G this year.  Most believe the B1G is a bit down this year.  I disagree.  The top may not fill up the national top 10, but top to bottom this league is a beast  Northwestern is a really good team.  I know, I watched them with my own eyes.  Michigan is really good (noticed they beat Purdue by 24 points the other day).  Every team I have watched this year (sans maybe Minnesota) looked really solid to me.  I especially realized this when I watched NU play Minnesota, who is a good but not great team, and how much different it was than all the other teams we have played so far in the B1G. 

 

Other teams were able to retain some very, very good 5th year seniors because of the extra year.  Think of Wisconsin and Brad Davison.  He torched us.  Had it not been for Covid, he wouldn't have been eligible.  Many teams have this advantage and having 5th or 6th year players is a huge, huge advatage.

 

In contrast, the only "covid" eligible players on NU are Webster and Lakes (who has been injured and never really played).  Now, we could blame Fred for this, but not really.  Fred inherited a mess and had to turn over the entire roster in year 1.  That is why many argue year 1 should not count.  But that turnover did not allow for these 5th and 6th year players to be on the roster this year unlike all of our B1G foes.  

 

This is where it gets tricky comparing Fred's record this year to other NU coaches in the past.  I just don't think we've ever seen a time when every team in the conference is so good/solid.  Plus, the B1G now has 20 conference games, so less chance to beat up on cupcakes (Doc's speciality).  

 

And one more thing.  And I know y'all are going to scream "excuses excuses", but I can't remember a year like this when the other teams seemed to be so healthy.  NU has had two pretty significant injuries in Trey and Wilhelm.  It seems like most of the teams we have played this year are at full or close to full strength.  I previous years, it seemed other teams always had injuries of major players and that allowed for an upset or two to happen.  Heck, a few years ago Miles NU team played Creighton when Creighton had 4 starters injured--and still lost!  Not this year.  Most every team we have played had most or all of their best players while NU did not have Trey and Wilhelm for most of the year.  Does anyone think we don't beat NC State if we have Trey?  Maybe others.  

 

In short, my position is that year 1 is a throw out year.  Year 2 was a mess because of Covid (no fans, players sitting out, the entire team could not play for 3 full weeks and then had to cram a bunch of games in, etc).  And now, in year 3, we are still under unique circumstances due to Covid that frankly, IMO, benefit most of the other teams much more than NU just do to the timing of when Fred was hired.  Again, call it an excuse.  But that is just what I see and that will go away next year because all those "extra year" players will be gone and it will go back to even for everyone.  

I understand this perspective to an extent. But the deficiencies of this team go far beyond the roster make up of both our team and the teams we’ve played on any given day due to injuries and Covid. Running a sustainable offense (not relying on 1-on-1 ball) as well as being any type of threat defensively the past 3 years for starters. I don’t care what the makeup of your team is, those two things should be at least somewhat addressed to the naked eye by this point. 

[BannedAccount]

Sooooo....i guess he still deserves another year?  What honestly is going to change but new players.  The same new players we also go in year 2 and year 3 which were supposed to be an upgrade.  Now we have all these excuses such as injuries and covid and 1st year and I dont see how next years players wii change the mindset and skill of this team.  Something is seriously flawed after 3 years and you cant convince me at this point next year will be any different.