Donkey

To be fair Doc’s hiring was not typical. Collier was not fired but took the Butler AD position not long before fall classes started. Pederson had few choices and needed to move quickly. I am not sure whether a better candidate was even available.

Looking at all the numbers, its crazy that 2-3 wins are all that keeps Nebraska from being on the bubble (and, IMO, in the tourney). I would only worry about the Non-Con SOS if Nebraska had lost to someone other than Texas Tech. 3 BIG Tourney wins with a semifinal loss (likely to Michigan St) would leave Nebraska with a Q1/Q2 record of 11-16. I kind of wonder how the committee would handle that analysis.

It is really hard to make that determination when you are only looking at Nebraska by itself. Right now Bracket Matrix has Butler as the last team in. Butler has a similar overall record but only 1 Quad 1 win (against Ole Miss) with only 2 Quad 1 games remaining on the schedule. Assuming Butler wins its remaining non-Quad 1 games and loses the Quad 1 games, Butler would have a 18-13, 9-9 final record with 1 Quad 1 win. I think a 17-14 Nebraska would be left out due to a 7-13 conference record (but I guarantee it would be closer than you think). However, it would be hard for the committee to take Butler over a 18-13 Nebraska squad with 5 Quad 1 wins. The next three -- Temple (0), Arizona St (2), and Clemson (1) -- also would have the same issues against a 18 win Nebraska. EDIT: I forgot to mention. Right now Nebraska does not have any Quad 3 or worse losses. Illinois and Rutgers are Quad 2. If Illinois wins a few more games, that could change to a Quad 1 loss. Tougher losses should give Nebraska an edge as well.

Quad 1 record: 2-8 Home: Purdue; Iowa Away: PSU; Michigan; MSU Conference Record: 5-10 I keep looking over last year's selections versus Quad 1 wins. This SOS is very tough and could help Nebraska. Oklahoma St (5) and LSU (6) were left out while Oklahoma (6) got in. All had 8-10 conference records. The biggest difference I can see differentiating this group is the Non-Con schedule. LSU had 3 losses with one being to Stephen F Austin at home. Oklahoma State had a lot of easy wins. I could see an Oklahoma type path if Nebraska goes 4-2. All of the above are Quad 1 wins. It will be hard for the Committee to ignore 6 Quad 1 wins. A 3-3 record would require a deep run into the BIG tourney. 2-4 or worse and Nebraska is NIT bound.

No doubt Turgeon does get good players, but he hardly has the area on lock down. It seems he lands the overrated local players and misses on the superstars. It really frustrates a lot of the base. Also, Under Armour/Maryland is nothing like Nike/Oregon. Maryland's fundraising base had surprisingly withered over the years (the Washington Post ran a really good article on this issue 6 months after it joined the BIG), and the AD was heavily in debt when Maryland joined the BIG. The stability at the top of the AD has been problematic recently as well. Further, the handling of DJ Durkin has led to some unrest within the AD. I am not trying to suggest Turgeon is looking around. I just am providing reasons why he would listen, and the likelihood of Maryland letting him go. Nebraska would have to be the aggressor as I doubt Maryland will fire Turgeon at this time. I do know that Maryland was very unhappy with Turgeon last year and would have considered cutting ties had Maryland endured an "average" season this year like what happened in 2017-2018.

My in-laws worked in the Maryland AD for years and are still very connected. The general view is that people like Turgeon but feel Maryland is deserving of a “better” coach. It reminds me of the relationship Mark Richt had with Georgia. If Nebraska were to offer, Maryland would not exactly fight to keep him. However, I have no clue as to Turgeon’s interest. On another note, a close friend of mine has a very close connection with Duke and shared the following. Evidently, once a year the Duke alumni newsletter examines the current basketball coaching staff during the season and identifies specific schools where each assistant coach could become a HC. The January 2019 newsletter listed Nebraska as one of five schools were Jon Scheyer could land as HC. At the time of publication, Miles had the team playing well; and the newsletter noted Scheyer to Nebraska would only occur if Miles was fired while, alternatively, the other schools were already on the brink of a coaching transition. The newsletter does not indicate whether Coach K had any input but these projections are not based on idle speculation.

Remaining Games: Quad 1 record: 2-4 Home: tOSU; Wisconsin; Maryland; Minnesota; Northwestern; Purdue; Iowa Away: Rutgers; Illinois, Purdue; PSU; Michigan; MSU Conference Record: 3-4 (2-1 home; 1-3 road). This link has all of the Quad 1 wins last year by school. https://herosports.com/college-basketball/bracketology-ncaa-team-sheet-quadrant-1-wins-michigan-ahah 4 Quad 1 wins seems to be the tourney bubble with 5 of 9 getting into the tournament. Georgia and Baylor had losing conference records. Marquette was identified by the committee, with Notre Dame, as the next two out. USC was likely the victim of a bad conference. Of the 5 of got in, Arizona, Gonzaga won their respective conference tournaments. of the remaining 3 at large qualifiers, Wichita State, Clemson, For the most part 5 Quad 1 wins gets you into the tourney. Oklahoma St (5 wins) and LSU (6 wins) were the only schools with more Quad 1 wins who were left out of the tourney, likely because both has losing conference records. I really believe the committee let Oklahoma (6 wins) in with a losing record because it did not want to look bad after listing Oklahoma in the early power rankings. Oddly enough, all of the at large play-in games were between schools with 3 Quad 1 wins. Syracuse, UCLA, and Arizona St seem to be rewarded for their strong non-conference records while St. Bonaventure had a 8 and 12 game winning streak during the season. Right now, Iowa, MSU, Michigan, Purdue (twice), Wisconsin, and Maryland are potential Quad 1 wins. 3-4 in those games and 5-0 in the remaining games (8-4 total) would leave Nebraska at 12-8 in the conference and safely in the tourney. I could see a scenario of 11-9 getting Nebraska into the tourney provided the additional loss results from a Quad 1 game.

2 2 Michigan Big Ten 17-0 3-0 2-0 12-0 0-0 7 7 Michigan St. Big Ten 15-2 4-1 2-1 9-0 0-0 10 10 Nebraska Big Ten 13-4 2-3 2-1 8-0 1-0 17 20 Purdue Big Ten 11-6 1-4 2-2 8-0 0-0 18 17 Maryland Big Ten 15-3 3-1 1-0 11-2 0-0 20 19 Wisconsin Big Ten 11-6 3-3 2-1 6-2 0-0 27 28 Iowa Big Ten 14-3 1-2 3-0 10-1 0-0 31 30 Indiana Big Ten 12-5 1-4 1-0 10-1 0-0 36 35 Ohio St. Big Ten 12-4 3-2 1-0 8-2 0-0 48 45 Minnesota Big Ten 13-3 1-2 4-0 8-1 0-0 58 58 Northwestern Big Ten 10-7 0-3 2-1 8-3 0-0 83 81 Penn St. Big Ten 7-10 1-5 1-2 5-3 0-0 126 125 Illinois Big Ten 4-12 0-4 0-4 4-4 0-0 131 113 Rutgers Big Ten 8-8 1-5 0-0 7-3 0-0 Remaining Games: Home: MSU; tOSU; Wisconsin; Maryland; Minnesota; Northwestern; Purdue; Iowa Away: Rutgers; Illinois, Purdue; PSU; Michigan; MSU Conference Record: 3-3 (2-0 home; 1-3 road). My original calculations had losing both Michigan State games. This Michigan State game could be huge for momentum as the remaining schedule is favorable until the last (back-to-back) road games against Michigan State and Michigan (followed by a closeout home game against Iowa). The Purdue road game could be the difference between 4-6 and 5-5. Depending on tonight's results, I now can see a 13-7 or 14-6 conference record. I like playing Rutgers after a tough Michigan State game.

3 3 Michigan Big Ten 15-0 2-0 2-0 11-0 0-0 7 7 Michigan St. Big Ten 13-2 3-1 2-1 8-0 0-0 15 15 Nebraska Big Ten 11-4 1-3 2-1 7-0 1-0 17 17 Wisconsin Big Ten 11-4 3-2 2-1 6-1 0-0 20 20 Indiana Big Ten 12-3 1-3 1-0 10-0 0-0 22 22 Purdue Big Ten 9-5 0-3 2-2 7-0 0-0 29 29 Ohio St. Big Ten 12-2 3-0 1-0 8-2 0-0 32 32 Maryland Big Ten 12-3 2-1 1-0 9-2 0-0 35 35 Iowa Big Ten 12-3 0-2 3-0 9-1 0-0 38 38 Minnesota Big Ten 12-2 1-2 4-0 7-0 0-0 56 56 Northwestern Big Ten 10-5 0-2 2-1 8-2 0-0 76 75 Penn St. Big Ten 7-8 1-4 1-2 5-2 0-0 125 126 Illinois Big Ten 4-11 0-4 0-4 4-3 0-0 135 135 Rutgers Big Ten 7-6 1-3 0-0 6-3 0-0 Remaining road games: Indiana, Rutgers, Illinois, Purdue, Penn State, MSU, Michigan. I wonder if games at Rutgers and Illinois may give the team enough confidence to win at Purdue. Still sticking to my 12-8 prediction.

Purdue is higher ranked than Maryland right now. Nebraska only dropped 4 places in the NET after losing to Maryland. Win or lose, the SOS is in our favor. It’s too early to discuss seeding. I just want to get in. 3 3 Michigan Big Ten 13-0 2-0 2-0 9-0 0-0 7 9 Michigan St. Big Ten 12-2 2-1 2-1 8-0 0-0 14 10 Nebraska Big Ten 11-3 1-2 2-1 7-0 1-0 15 14 Wisconsin Big Ten 10-3 2-2 2-1 6-0 0-0 18 19 Ohio St. Big Ten 12-1 3-0 1-0 8-1 0-0 21 21 Indiana Big Ten 11-2 1-2 1-0 9-0 0-0 30 30 Purdue Big Ten 8-5 0-3 2-2 6-0 0-0 32 42 Maryland Big Ten 11-3 1-1 1-0 9-2 0-0 35 36 Iowa Big Ten 11-2 0-1 3-0 8-1 0-0 52 50 Minnesota Big Ten 11-2 0-2 4-0 7-0 0-0 60 54 Northwestern Big Ten 9-5 0-2 2-1 7-2 0-0 74 77 Penn St. Big Ten 7-6 1-3 1-2 5-1 0-0 124 129 Illinois Big Ten 4-9 0-2 0-4 4-3 0-0 127 126 Rutgers Big Ten 7-5 1-3 0-0 6-2 0-

Thought I would start a thread to discuss Nebraska's chances of making the tournament. As some may remember, I was not high on Nebraska getting into the tournament last year mostly due to the lack of Quad 1 wins and the BIG being down. Losses to Illinois and Penn State really impacted Nebraska last year combined with no Quad 1 wins. This year, I feel the exact opposite. Currently, Nebraska is 11-3 with 3 Quad 1 losses. Based on comments made by the selection committee last year, I got the impression a Quad 1 loss seemed to hold equal weight to a Quad 3 win. Looking forward, I see Nebraska getting in with a 12-8 BIG record regardless of BIG tourney outcome. How we get there? 1. 3 road wins: Move on from Minnesota and Maryland. MUST WIN: Illinois, Rutgers, and Penn State. A road win against any of the remaining teams likely will be a Quad 1 win. 2. 9-1 home record: very doable. Nebraska tends to play well at home over the years. Just need to make sure the loss is to a Quad 1 team. The remaining road schedule is very rough, but should help the SOS component of the NET. Really, the more road wins, the better.

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/25015812/g-league-offer-professional-path-elite-prospects-not-wanting-go-one-done-route-ncaa This could wreak havoc on college basketball rosters. Its not clear whether these contracts are available to kids who have already signed their LOI. Picture Kentucky signing a full class in November only to lose them all to the G League (plus other players declaring early). That being said, I think this route is the right way to go.

This reasoning reminds me of a certain football player.

Hearing the practices are going well. Team is really focused and Thomas Allen has really stepped up. Seems Chan is equal to (or better than) Jordy offensively (if that means anything) but have not heard about Chan defensively.

Let's be fair. The quadrant system sets the standard with how wins are categorized based off of the ratings systems (now NET, formerly RPI). In previous years, valuing wins was subjective. Emphasis each year was placed on different arguments such as non-conference record, perceived conference strength, record over the last ten games, conference finish. Every year the litmus test would change. Last year things were more standardized (which screwed Nebraska). Schools like Oklahoma, whether intentional or not, took advantage of the new system for their benefit even though their final record was problematic. The smartest thing the SEC and Big 12 did last year was schedule a number of match ups in February. Their respective conference RPIs increased and it really helped their schools overall. The BIG should schedule a number of marquee match ups Super Bowl weekend at neutral locations (e.g. dome football stadiums) for the same reason. Win or lose, the feature neutral court games will not hurt either school. I would also schedule marquee mid-major games on neutral courts as well (Nevada at Vegas, Gonzaga or St. Mary's in Portland, San Diego St in LA, etc.). That way if you lose, the hit won't be as bad. I agree this new system will screw over mid-majors and small schools. If I were the AAC, Mountain West, A-10, or CUSA, I would fill my entire schedule with road games at P5/Big East schools. If they were smart, I would take the top 2-3 schools from each mid-major conference and host a tournament around Christmas. Get in around 3-4 games with good mid-major schools, and they might see their chances for 1-2 at large bids go up.

Did you see him in 1994? That team is considered the greatest AAU team of all time with Bryant, Vince Carter, Rip Hamilton, and Tim Thomas all playing together.

Good points, but I wonder if Gallegos' graduating had more of an impact than realized. Even though Gallegos did not put up the numbers his senior year like he did his junior year, he still was a legitimate scoring threat. Coaches had to game plan for him. Also, Gallegos was a 3pt threat which opened the floor for Petteway and Shields. Also consider that Pitchford, another 3pt threat went from .410 to .289 from behind the arc. Teams were just not as afraid of Nebraska's 3pt shooting in 2014-2015. That clogged the offense. Leslee Smith's injury also made an impact. There was no offense and limited defense in the post with Hammond (true frosh, needed a year in the weight room), Rivers (undersized), and Moses (knees). For 2018-2019, Gill's loss is somewhat mitigated as he seemed to wear down as the season concluded. The offense improved when Gill was shooting well. Evan Taylor was solid off the bench and it will be interesting to see who can hold down that role. However, like in 2014-2015, it really comes down to whether 3pt shooting stays the same/improves instead of regressing.

While those things matter, (and Louisville has them) a good number of schools can compete with Louisville in those areas and a great number of them would love to have the intangibles I listed.

Pretty much. A "down" year for a school like Louisville is to not make it to the Sweet 16 (which Pitino did 8 times in his career).

1. Coaching stability. Louisville has had 2 coaches in 46 years. Both Crum and Pitino had bad seasons but never worried about getting fired. The fans are actually patient out there. 2. Metropolitan area: Louisville is the 14th biggest metropolitan area in the country with direct flights all over the country. 3. NBA arena. With no NBA team to compete against. Heck, Louisville is the big show in town. 4. Solid non-conference schedule. A guaranteed game against Kentucky every year with frequent match ups against Indiana. Also, the local mid-major schools (WKU, Murray St, Southern Ill, etc.) help the RPI. Louisville and WKU play almost every year (while Kentucky will do everything it can to avoid WKU). 5. Central location. Chicago, St. Louis, Nashville are manageable drives away. There are daily direct flights to Washington DC and the New England area (e.g. access to lots of prep schools). 6. Knowledgeable fan base. I lived in Kentucky for a few years and found the locals to be very knowledge in basketball (without regard to whether they were Kentucky or Louisville fans). I have heard the stories of Indiana residents and their fascination with basketball and have been more impressed with Kentuckians. 7. ACC. Always a huge draw for coaches and players.

I agree it will be less common, but very few guys were redshirt over the last 15-16 years. Miles has only redshirted Sergej and Fuller the entire time he has been here. Gallegos, McCray, and Edwards (maybe Myles Holley) were the only recruits who redshirted for Doc. I remember Doc complaining about losing recruits who refused to redshirt and basically stopped pushing redshirts afterward. Gallegos, if memory serves correct, requested the redshirt between his sophomore and junior years. It paid off well for him. I also think saving redshirts is a good idea to protect against injuries. If the kid gets hurt 1/4 of the way through the season, he should be able to use the redshirt there. Always felt bad for McCray when he lost a year after only playing 3 games.

Actually second round picks are quite valuable, and the player holds more bargaining power than a late first rounder. It is true that first round picks are automatically guaranteed money for the first 3 years; however, all first round picks compensation are based on a sliding scale meaning the player is unable to negotiate a deal. There is no set compensation structure for second round picks, and agents are able to negotiate salaries informally prior to the draft. There have been a few instances where players receive more money as a second round pick than a late first. The majority of this money is also guaranteed which includes the signing bonus. Further, second rounders, more often than not, get more say in where they are selected due to the way the NBA Draft is set up. Unlike the NFL, NBA prospects sometimes shun the combine and it is not uncommon for players to withhold medical information from clubs the players don’t want to play for. Clubs like Sacramento really struggle drafting players as a result. It is also common for agents to shut down visits/workouts once a favorable club has guaranteed it will draft the player and favorable contract terms have been worked out. Also, a second rounder can always opt to go overseas for more development. When they come back, they can negotiate their salaries (unlike a first rounder). Conversely, NBA undrafted free agents are largely space fillers for summer leagues and preseason. Their contracts are not always guaranteed even if they make the final roster leaving them the first players cut the minute depth is needed at a position not filled by the player.

Posted less than 24 hours ago. https://pittsburghsportsnow.com/2018/04/24/guard-xavier-johnson-recaps-visit-to-pitt/ "What’s next for Johnson? He told PSN that he’ll be making a visit shortly to South Carolina and others could follow. Johnson wants to make his college decision before graduation, which is on May 31. He put Pitt near the top of his list. “Right now, it’s a tie between Pitt and Nebraska,” he said.

Miles wanted a full, three year extension. He did not get it. Miles has been in a precarious position for a couple of years now. A year ago, Miles was told Nebraska had to be dancing in 2018 or he would be fired. Miles has a job because (a) Nebraska finished 4th in the B1G; (b) the belief Nebraska should have been in the tournament and was screwed by the committee; and (c) a good amount of talent is supposedly coming back.

I doubt a P5/Big East school would seriously consider Miles. Nebraska’s facilities and fan base are known and respected commodities. Schools like Minnesota will see that Miles struggled at Nebraska and move on. I do see Miles catching on at a mid major like New Mexico. The smart, more established mid majors will not hire the next up and coming coach. They hire a more established coach who isn’t going to look around and recruit for his system. The sad thing is that Nebraska’s bereft tradition leaves fans accepting Miles 2017-2018 season as a high water mark. Meanwhile, LSU fired Johnny Jones, a good coach who built North Texas into a solid program, despite having a markedly better record than Miles over a shorter period. Sorry for the rant. I guess I am tired of rehashing whether we should continue to allow Miles to built his bridge to no where (or at least what seems to be a plan of unfulfilled expectations).