basketballjones

Can we get Allick off the court, please? Good lord what is this?

My guess is he had it scoped. Should be fine by conference stretch.

I just heard that also. No other details.

I don’t know if anyone ever says anything but I really appreciate the work you put into these.

NU - 84 ND - 67

I wonder if I can get him to carry me and a take a picture like he did when I was a baby?

Idk man, Mast looks tired from the jump. He's just an old man with old-man knees. I think he's fine. He looks like a guy who can self-regulate and rest when he needs.

I think it's important though that he maintains in the same role. I don't think this "works" if he starts. Then he has expectations and needed statistical output. Coming off the bench as a back-up PG fits him nicely. Interject some serious energy, dog a guy defensively, attack the paint, maybe hit a big shot, etc...

My favorite play of that game was with ~:50 left and the game entirely in hand, JL jumps a passing lane and gets a tip, then dives for the loose ball. When players can eliminate having context determine their habits and effort you end up with a good team.

4-9

We just rubbed our nuts all over their drum set.

Who ever gets A'mare is certainly getting a project. I recently saw him play, there's a lot there to work with... Like, it's "all there." Just none of it is there yet. Also, just looking at his build - I'm not so sure he's not done growing yet. Roughly 6'8" now - could he be a 6'10" guy?

Sorry just puked a little in my mouth.

What's Hoiberg's record when we have roughly a week off? Isn't it miserable?

NU 71 KSU 77

This team is pretty much going to f*** with our heads all season.

NU 69 MS 80 4 3pt

That’s a great joke and you deserve attention for it.

I think we way over think recruiting here for NU bball. I have an entire philosophy on this, but I'm afraid if I type it entirely out I'll be giving off less Kirby Smart vibes and more Ted Kaczynski vibes.

There is absolutely no possible way this is an accurate or correct statement.

I have some disagreements with you and I hope you take them all 100% personally. I think the order, or maybe emphasis (?), is a bit off. Personally I believe #2 and #3 are the most important and it's hard to rank one of them higher than the other. The most important part of being a successful athletics program is having talent. There's really no replacement or substitute for it. Obviously, the question becomes about having the "right talent" that fits #2 and fits the culture/context of your program and your conference. But as much as it pains me to say this, as it is my favorite aspect of basketball and coaching, but the tangible tactical/x's and o's/philosophy stuff is far and away the least important part. Obviously, you have to know this stuff and be competent in these tactical areas - and hire assistants who are nerds about it too - but it can't be your "thing." Or else you end up with Scott Frost, and what I worry we're seeing, Fred Hoiberg. Coach Hoiberg seems to have made a lot of changes to focus more on culture and intangibles, and bring in assistants who fill in the gaps. But, at the end of the day, I believe Coach is primarily a tactical guy who thinks that X's and O's and execution are the solution. So to re-order your list to fit my thoughts... I would have it more like this: 1. Recruiting/Talent Identification and Development/Leadership/Cohesiveness/Program Vision I just don't think you can separate or remove any of those things, or put one ahead of the other. They're all on the same plane in my opinion. 2. Program Intangible Consistency More important than the X's and O's are non-negotiable things like Toughness, Communication, Accountability, Passion, Energy, Competitiveness, etc... Those intangible things that have to remain the same whether you're running zone, match-up, motion, continuity, it doesn't matter. Rarely is there a great coach out there who gets mentioned, and then the next thing mentioned is their tactical stuff. It's all about leadership and intangibles. - - - 3. X's and O's, Schemes, etc... The only thing I believe that has to happen here is that they have one, are willing to adapt and change, can coach what they believe in, and can find the guys who fit what they are trying to do (or change when they don't have that). But it can't be their main focus, and it can't be their major appeal. Honestly - Tim Miles should have been the guy. I think he actually fits, in theory, what all of us want in a head coach here. - Won at multiple levels and it was his programs (not like the Doc/Gillespie thing). - Had a unique and engaging personality that seemed to fit NU/Midwest. - When he was hired there wasn't any, or very little anyways, talk about him being an offensive mind or a defensive guru. You just knew he won and knew how to build a program, and identify talent to fit what he wanted to do. I have my theories on why I believe Miles didn't succeed here and I have shared them to much disagreement from people who (seemed to at least) have a semi-personal/personal relationship with Coach Miles, so I don't want to get into that again. But personally I believe we're probably looking for another Coach Miles type. Won at every level. Gets the area and is engaging. His teams have intangible blood lines that run throughout every program he's lead or been a part of. Has an X's and O's system he knows how to coach.

As embarrassing of a week for husker basketball as I can remember.

It’s not good after 9!

Fooled by another Nebraska basketball team. You’d think I’d learn

Season defining stretch coming up here after this Timeout. Godspeed gentlemen.