Norm Peterson

10.5 mpg, 3.7 ppg, 3.5 rpg 10.2 mpg, 2.1 ppg, 2.7 rpg 4.4 mpg, 1.8 ppg, 0.8 rpg

Didn't say I'd never go back. But I have to narrow things down somehow. Can only have dinner at one place. Glad you had a good experience. Anything bad to say about Monarch?

I got the distinct impression it was not like he was trying to drop a hint, but that he knows something and just can't say it out loud. As my son said, he was awfully specific about what he had to say about the type of player he's looking to add. A very specific attribute. He could have just said "we need an athletic 4 and we hope to still be able to find one at this point." Instead he said 4-star. Love to have a 4-star. Not a 5-star like Copeland, but a 4-star like Roby. And I don't know the name or maybe I do and just can't say it. If he didn't have a particular someone in mind, I don't think he would have explained it like that. But that's just my rose-colored sunglasses take.

Agreed. If I get there, I'll give everyone a run-down. I'm a cook; not a chef. I'm an eater; not a foodie. I love food; I love eating food; I know what I know about food and that which I know, I know pretty well. But I guess I'm about as much of an expert in food as I am in basketball, which is to say I have an opinion and I'm not afraid to express it.

I went to the 801 Chophouse on someone else's dime back when it was the Paxton Chophouse. Still same owners, just made the name of all three locations the same. It was the best steak dinner I've ever had, but thanks for the warning. I'll cross it off the list.

Yep. Not trying to impress Vera so much as honor her. Not afraid to spend coin. Money is not an issue on this one. Do not care about the price tag; just want the best fine dining experience out there w/in an hour drive of my home.

So, fine dining, I've got V Mertz. 801 Chophouse, anyone? What about Mahogany Prime? Boiler Room? Flemings? Spezia?

Love lo sole mio.

Another mid-week OT thread from Norm. If you were going to be in Omaha and you wanted to eat some place nice, where would you go? I'm looking for recommendations.

Glynn Watson's 3-point shooting percentages by season: Freshman year: .267 Sophomore year: .397 Junior year: .291 Senior year: .448

How many of Roby's turnovers this year are because "calling offensive fouls on Nebraska" appears to be a point of emphasis for officials this year?

I've watched a few of his games, fast-forwarding through all the timeouts, etc. I'd say that's not quite accurate. The first game I watched, I guess I thought he attacked the glass more in transition than in the half court. Upon further review and watching more games, this guy can take his defender off the dribble and get to the rack pretty well. I'm not sure if he's quite as good at that as Nate Johnson. And Nate Johnson was spectacular from three-point range his senior year as well. But Jervay can drive and he can dish and he can hit perimeter jumpers and make some really good passes, and it's easy to see why Miles is excited about him.

Agree with you on finding one more big. Miles agrees with you too. Four-star-level talent. Said so on his Monday evening radio show (and implied he has someone in mind.) He's really high on Jervay Green as a starting PG for next year. Jervay, Burke and Thomas Allen. That's kind of what he implied as being the leading candidates to start in the backcourt. Then, we need another power forward. Four-star-type power forward. Check out my last post in the Jervay Green thread for the money quote.

We are going to be a tough out for anyone except the elite teams come March. We have the kind of roster that historically does well in the dance. We have excellent guard play. We can draw fouls and we get to the line a lot. And we play really good defense.

"If we could get a 4-star power forward -- and I don't know his name yet or can't share his name yet or whatever -- I think we could be really good next year." Did anyone else catch this subtle comment?

Makes sense. He has the primary ball-handling responsibilities on his team, the one who typically brings the ball up the floor and initiates the offense. I've seen him make some pretty good passes and his first move is typically to pass the ball off so, in spite of the fact he has put up some gaudy numbers, when you watch him play, he doesn't typically call his own number first.

Good point about intangibles. There were some chemistry issues on that 2013 team that blew up in 2014. You could kind of see them coming if you were paying attention. For example, after our NCAA tourney loss in 2013, Walt tweeted out some comments that were decidedly passive-aggressive, "poor me" in tone. Words to the effect that we lost to Baylor because we didn't get Walt the ball enough. People I knew who had met and become friends with the Petteways told me that Terran, when he was debating whether to come back or turn pro, had decided he would NOT come back if Pitchford was going to still be on the team. Terran had a strong personality and I suspect was the kind of guy who didn't suffer fools gladly. And it sounds like he perceived Walt P as a fool he wasn't willing to tolerate. Not trying to diss either Walt or Terran, but the contrasts between those two and James and Cope couldn't be more stark. Whereas Terran was moody and brooding and played with his emotions on his sleeve, James is a cut-up. You watch him coming off the floor and he's almost always grabbing one of his teammates and laughing about something. And Cope seems quiet but workmanlike and all business. He gets his touches and I think he knows there are plenty to go around. They just seem like they're playing for something bigger than individual goals. To add to the positive chemistry for this year's team, you have Glynn, who is the consummate professional out there, and Roby, who at times isn't selfish enough. From a distance, these guys just look like they get along and enjoy playing with each other and have set some team goals rather than individual ones. I think it's a night-and-day difference compared to the Petteway-Pitchford teams.

No, but I don't think TA draws Petteway as his defensive assignment, either. Neither team had a true post. Copeland most logically lines up with Pitchford and Roby most logically lines up with Rivers. Watson and Webster are obvious as both are point guards. But it seems to me that Palmer and Petteway have the next most in common. This team has an extra guard; that team had an extra wing. There's an odd man comparison either way. I just thought Petteway and Palmer were the most logical comparison.

Sr. Watson >>> Fr. Webster or So Parker Sr. Palmer > So. Petteway Jr. Roby >>>>> Jr. Rivers Sr. Copeland >>> So Pitchford So. Allen = So. Shields This team is better than that team was.

Check out them apples.

Been thinking about this. Five seasons ago, when we last made a run to the NCAA tourney, people kept posting graphics from realtimerpi, etc., projected our odds of winning x, y, and z number of games to finish the season. I completely disregarded those charts with projections of our percentage chances of winning various games. Instead, I said we're either good enough (to make the dance) or we're not. If we're good enough, we're going to win the games we need to in order to get in, and, at the time, I thought we were good enough. So, the needle moved from, like, 0.2% chance of getting to 19 wins to 100% chance of getting to 19 wins. Because we were good enough that year to do it. I look at this team this year and it's a slightly different feeling. Again, I don't care about computers projecting odds of us reaching a certain win total. I see a team that is not simply good enough to make the dance; I see a team that is good enough to make some noise in the dance. Now, crap can happen. Lose a game we shouldn't, and next thing you know, we're playing catch-up. Nothing is a foregone conclusion here. But we are most certainly good enough this year. We're a better team than we were in 2013. We're more balanced; we have more guys who can score; dare I say that we play better defense? You can't just shut down one of our guys and beat us. This team can go into Maryland and win. This team could win at Iowa. And here's the thing: It won't take luck. That's right. IT WON'T TAKE LUCK. Years past, you'd say "if we bring our 'A' game" or "If we get some lucky bounces, who knows?" This year? We're a dangerous team. We won't necessarily win every game left on our schedule, but you know what? Every team left on our schedule is going to need to bring THEIR "A" game to beat us. This is the year, guys. That monkey is preparing his dismount.

Are you saying even a blind squirrel wold have found the Scott Frost nut when Mike Riley was fired? That's perhaps true. However, I don't think Scott Frost would have come to Nebraska to work for a blind squirrel named Shawn Eichorst.

Make sure your thesaurus speaks Yiddish.

I think this is a subtle, back-handed dig at Creighton for not being in the top 40. Or top 50. I'm guessing that's what he's getting at.

We had a real, real, real good basketball team last year, too, and he was curiously silent about it. Bandwagon jumper.