basketballjones

God this would be amazing.

I stupidly exaggerated. You are right. But, I will say that I have first-hand experiences with this subject.

Every program in the nation does something like that. Just some got caught. If you don't think we're right there doing things like that, I've got some land in the Sandhills with an Ocean view I'd like to sell you.

I know it's the Cardinal sin of this website and Husker-Fandom to say this... But Greg McDermott runs an incredible program and does things the right way.

That's big time.

I'm part surprised by this, and part incredibly excited about this. I also basically stopped following his recruiting months ago, so maybe this isn't news to anyone. On one hand - he's a national recruit and I'm surprised he chose to go somewhere where over half your games are against mid-major competition. Also, Gonzaga is a tough find for TV, being small-conference and West Coast. However - Gonzaga does play big games in the non-con, and they are a lock for a top 3 seed in the NCAA tournament year in, year out. That being said, I am super excited about this because Mark Few does not F*** around. There's not many other coaches around with the security he has, and he will iron out all the flaws in Hunter's game and approach to the game.

Right. The days of having your 5'11" guy who doesn't look to shoot/score, but gets everyone in the right spot and holds numbers up on his fingers, are over. I think the Derrick Roses, Russell Westbrooks, of the world and analytics basically ended that idea. You want the guy who has the ball in his hands a lot getting to the paint and either scoring or directly creating the bucket. Also, everyone runs some sort of pattern, or at a minimum, a highly principled and spacing rules offense. Everyone needs to know where to be and where to move or how to react. So it's not like you need some guy walking it up and yelling, "Chicago," "Kansas," "5," or whatever, each time up the court. Most "in game" calls made are just determined reads/entries into your pattern/motion offense. Any actual "set plays," ran are discussed during dead balls.

Honestly, I think we're a lot closer than you/me/we think we are.

To answer your question - I thought we looked nice with Webster running it a bit. But who knows. I don't think I even know what "point guard" means anymore.

"I may not be tall, but I'm slow!"

I wasn't going to say anything on here.... But I might as well let the cat out of the bag. Matt A. actually contacted me the other night - It's me - I'm playing point next year! Pretty excited about it.

"Coach Matt? You serious?" "Teddy? Dammit sorry it's just a habit..."

1. It's literally not every team. If you think I'm exaggerating about contracting every transfer, you're doing the same. Which, I guarantee we have contacted more transfers than any other Power 5 conference team. Every single guy who comes in the portal has "heard from Nebraska." 4. At what point do you stop? When do you just say, "hey this guy is pretty good and he's our guy, we don't to be out contacting every one else to recruit over them."?

Nope, that one is going to actually play somewhere, probably lower level. We did get one of the twins to walk on. Not sure what the other is doing.

I've kind of become an old, "get off my lawn," type with NCAA sports. Let's absolutely find a better way to make sure they are always fed and full, can travel easily, families are taken care of when they travel to games, etc... But if you want to "make money" off your NIL, or whatever, you just don't go to college. Colleges are worried that they will stop making money because the big time players will leave. It's an unfounded worry. There won't be unlimited NBA G-League teams. And no one follows G-League/Minor league sports. PBA will still be full. Memorial Stadium will still be full. No one will passionately follow and track the "Omaha Bugeaters," the NFL farm team where a few top prep prospects ended up instead of playing for the Huskers.

I think a few things need to change: 1. Stop making NBA prospects go to college. Let them go right out of HS/Prep. 2. One free transfer out of conference, eligible immediately. Sit one year if in conference if you haven't transferred yet (but you lose your free year). 3. Have to sit a year on next transfer, two years within conference. 4. Get rid of graduate transfers. When the heck did this start anyways? At minimum, make them completely prove their school does not have the graduate program they are in. 5. I would flirt with the MLB idea of either never go, but if you do, you're there for 2-3 years. 6. Stop with the exceptions. They must be serious and completely confirmed. Make this more black and white.

What an incredible paragraph. Excellent point. Maybe Coach Hoiberg and Co. have seen the future before everyone else and they're just completely bought into it. Matt Abdelmassih is effectively our roster management GM. Hoiberg just coaches whoever he brings in. Creighton does. Return a core group almost every year. Guys mostly stay. Bigs develop. Wisconsin certainly. Iowa. I feel there's plenty of teams who do a great job of returning a core group year in, year out. Maybe take some sit-out transfers, or an immediate gap filler, but the core remains the same. Could be wrong though. Strong disagree. Most Coaches absolutely hate it. Some thrive in it, but still can't stand it. And honestly I think a lot of players really don't like it as much as you'd think they like the "freedom." That's just a hunch though.

Amazing how complicated some guys make it, isn't it?

Do you want to know how dumb I am? I thought TyTy and Tyson Walker were the same people. Who the heck is Tyson Walker? I'm losing track of every single one of these guys.

Not sure. I get the vibe Hunter views himself as a National level, blue-blood, top program in the nation, type of guy. Not someone going to a rebuild.

Hmmm..... Pros: Arguably the best player on a rated, NCAA tournament team. Elite ball screen manipulator (desperately missing this) Electric in transition (desperately missing this) Big time athlete/body for the B1G, at his position Cons: Has clashed with a coach most consider an elite players-coach Nearly 1:1 A:TO. Which is not something we need more of Looks to be a bit of a jack. And we've seen how that looks I think I would rather have TyTy over the long term... But looking at the "Pros," I kinda feel silly even questioning taking a guy like this.

If we have Cam Mack this year instead of Teddy Allen, we aren't in the bottom 4 teams in the conference IMO. Ball Dominant doesn't have to mean selfish.

Hmmmm.... Disagree with you there. If you don't think there's plenty of guys who go to places because they know they can be the guy eventually, I'd say you're crazy. If I was a guy who actually had a lot of skill but needed the ball in my hands to demonstrate that - I am not going to go to somewhere where they already have a ball dominant guy or they're trying to tell me I'm going to sit in the corner and be a 3 and D guy.

Great response. Was kind of trying to play "Devil's Advocate," and put myself into the mind of a prep-target. But I do disagree with your responses to #3 and #4. I think #3 is an incredibly fair question to ask. And I disagree with #4. Not every coach attempts to "over-recruit" their roster every year. A lot of the goods take what they have and figure out where they need to compliment and fill-gaps.

Reasons I would say yes: 1. Incredible facilities, resources, and school. 2. I really do believe Coach Hoiberg is an incredible coach. And I love his assistants. 3. Opportunity to be "the guy" (big fish, smaller pond). 4. Opportunity to be the first team to win an NCAA Tournament Game.