Dean Smith

So I can watch the game on a real tv?

Fan's don't "deserve" anything. You're not putting any sweat or flesh into this project. I know we are talking about big money nowadays but we've come a long way from where college athletics (and high school) are supposed to be. The games are supposed to be for the players and we are just lucky that they let us in to get to watch. I can't stand to go to high school games and hear people yell at other people's kids the same way they would at a professional athlete when they mess up. Step back, breathe and enjoy the entertainment.

And as long as the season went well, TP would have been a positive asset. If things started to drift a bit for him, I could see him pulling the boat down with him. Seemed like a good kid, could hit some tough shots, I'm sure Miles would have great things to say about him, but for me he's not the type you want to build a program with. If you have a strong core both talent and character-wise then maybe he's a kid you take a chance on. That way if he doesn't work out you show him the door. Or if you are a building program hoping to maybe get lucky on a player, you take a risk on him. That's how he ended up here. I don't want to be a character assassin on a kid but I don't hold him in near as high regard as a player as many on this board. He was great for the program his first year and I thoroughly enjoyed the end of the season run. My hope is that Nebraska gets to the point where we are strong enough that we can take a flyer on that type of player but if he doesn't work out no one notices that he's not there the next year.

A double from twelve feet away with a 5'8" guy when they are running a two man game... Never going to work. It will work when the post puts the ball on the floor which most do. There are times when a coach will tell a player not to help off who they are guarding but in the big picture of your normal defensive rotations, it was the second rotation that was the problem not the first. We weren't "helping the helper" fast enough. They need to start rotating as soon as the help goes to the post, not on the catch. I usually tried to help from the perimeter but one pass away from the passer to not give the easy return pass to the post feeder. When teams are spaced correctly the whole thing is very difficult no matter where you help from.

When we at this level, we're not talking about your junior high 2-3. At this point you have straight rotations, long rotations, short rotations, matchup variations, zones that look a lot like man, and zones that trap. And there are various ways to trap out of any zone. And every zone ever invented to this point turns into a 2-3 when the ball gets to the elbow. The question is how you rotate to that, and how you rotate out of that on ball movement. I know this doesn't really address your question, but I think sometime to the general public it can be hard to understand how complicated things can get when running something like a 2-3 when it seems like it should be really simple.

I'm certainly not the expert but I've seen a little basketball and I'm not sure what you saw to say we were badly out coached? I'm not saying we weren't but I'm curious to know what you saw that makes you say that. You can game plan for something but your scout team is not going to be able to duplicate what you see in the game at the speed it really happens. Sometimes there is a big gap between the gameplan and the player execution. Since I've not been to practice or meetings, I don't know enough to say one was more at fault than the other.We did seem to struggle adjusting to the post rim run throughout the game but I also think we made some good adjustments. What did you see that made you feel things were tipped drastically Michigan's way? They don't really do a lot of stuff, they just seem to do what they do very well. You don't necessarily have to have done a bad job of coaching to be outcoached. Michigan executed at an incredibly high level on both ends of the court. I am surprised you didn't notice. They didn't have more talent than we did. But we were having a tough time dealing with their switching everything defense. We didn't have the driving lanes we had been creating. What I saw was a team without elite talent finding open shots quite often, and back cuts quite often. They also played a great defensive game with a great defensive game plan. Not sure what you saw that would object to my take. No scout team is ever going to execute another game plan like their starters will so that is a little bit silly IMO. What I could get on board with is the term "badly." Perhaps, simply saying we got outcoached would be a little more accurate. I think that is a game we should have won. We didn't. I did think we gave effort, so there was a problem somewhere. To me it was in the X and O execution, and Michigan has one of the best coaches at accomplishing X and O execution. Miles wasn't the first and won't be the last to get outsmarted by him. I agree with most of what you say. It just appears we have different definitions of out coached.

There's a reason they didn't have Petteway on their list. He helped get Nebraska to the NCAA's but he's a Jaron Boone at best. He couldn't play a cohesive style with those other four guys you listed either. Strickland would fit better if you just want to build the best team.

I'm certainly not the expert but I've seen a little basketball and I'm not sure what you saw to say we were badly out coached? I'm not saying we weren't but I'm curious to know what you saw that makes you say that. You can game plan for something but your scout team is not going to be able to duplicate what you see in the game at the speed it really happens. Sometimes there is a big gap between the gameplan and the player execution. Since I've not been to practice or meetings, I don't know enough to say one was more at fault than the other.We did seem to struggle adjusting to the post rim run throughout the game but I also think we made some good adjustments. What did you see that made you feel things were tipped drastically Michigan's way? They don't really do a lot of stuff, they just seem to do what they do very well.

There is not enough data and way too many variables to make a definitive statement either way.

My point was that we should appreciate what walk ons bring to the program. If we are going to make it to the next level program their contribution need to be overwhelmingly in practice. If you watched the two games where they received extended playing time you could see the gulf between their athleticism and abilities compared to the scholarship players. I take exception to those saying those two will contribute on the floor before they are done. My point is they were free tickets and it's not fair to compare them to the scholarship players or have overinflated expectations of what they can offer a top level program IN games. I appreciate all the hard work and effort they give to make the team better. Players on the floor are expected to fill different roles and a walk on's role 99 out of 100 times needs to be that practice player or you will not be able to maintain a high level program. So I am saying there's a chance.

That might be a generally accurate statement, but it's not a factual one. Iowa is currently playing a red shirt walk-on freshman significant minutes while currently in the lead for the conference championship and a high NCAA tournament team. Kids get overlooked. Borchardt, much like Jacobson, was recruited to play Div 1 football. He's an athlete. Is it so painful to fathom that he might see some playing time as he matures, especially for a team that currently doesn't have anyone locked up who weighs over 240#? I said this earlier this year that I certainly don't want to be the one hating on college kids but I think you put undue expectations on the walk ons to say they will be contributing players. I watched the end of the Illinois game and they were so outclassed I was worried Miles would have to put the starters back in because they were giving up a big chunks of our lead in a hurry. In the scientific community the Baer story is what is known as anecdotal evidence. It's a nice story but it is not statistically significant enough to mean anything. Someone did win the lottery but that doesn't mean buying lottery tickets is a good investment. There is an exception to every rule. The contributing non-scholarship athlete exists but you can't build a program doing that. Its possible Iowa won the lottery with that kid. I have high expectation/wishes for nebrasketball and you can't get to where I would love to see the program by playing walk ons significant minutes. The rule is to compete at the highest level you have to consistently recruit high level athletes. Hoping walk ons will get you there is like buying lottery tickets. They might make you feel good for awhile but you're going to be disappointed when the numbers are announced which would in this analogy be the announcement of the NCAA tournament field.

How are we/he going to finish up this year? To me he's more Ryan Anderson than he is Piatkowski. I'm not entirely sure he's ever been the best player on any of the 4 teams he's been on. He's a very good player but Mount Rushmore discussion? Not so sure. The best player is not always the one that scores the most points. I've thought from day one this year that Shields in the best player on this year's team.

To actually answer the question, I also say McVeigh. I'm not a big fan of player comparisons but I think someone on here said he had the potential to be our Sam Dekker. I can see with a little added muscle he could get there. He already has shown a couple of finishes this year that I don't think anyone else on the team could have pulled off.

And I say again, if that's the case then we're going the wrong way. The gap between how they're playing right now is big, but the gap between the potential of Borchart and Morrow/Jacobson is even greater. Walk ons can be a great part of the program but a conference championship caliber, NCAA tournament game winning team can't have walk ons playing meaningful minutes.

I hate to be the negative one but if that comes true then the program is going the wrong direction. I think we saw the huge gap between our walkons and real scholarship D1 athletes when they got 4 to 5 minutes at the end of the Illinois game.

Most "experts" now agree that you can be just as aggressive lifting in season as out, but over lifting is never OK. People used to say, "Don't lift it will throw off your shot." That's crazy talk now. I wish someone would have made me lift period. By the time I started I missed that two week window of my top athletic prowess. I don't see how Morrow could get out of a big league high school program these days without seeing the inside of the weight room.

Why did you stick Rutgers on the bottom? Just so the pessimists couldn't list us as an 0 for? This is in the order we play our next 6 games. We have the Scarlet Knights on the schedule twice I know. But the next five will be tough. The sixth shouldn't be. Seeing Rutgers on that list is like the old Sesame Street song "..these things go together. One of these things just doesn't belong."

Why did you stick Rutgers on the bottom? Just so the pessimists couldn't list us as an 0 for?

I like MIles and hate when almost anyone that does anything has people saying, "Fire them," but I haven't like the offense run here with or without Smith.

Me?

Heiman moves well but is really physically weak right now. It appears no one has every taught him a post move and as if the Platteview coaches have no idea what to do with him. The don't really do anything at all to use the kid. Basically if he has potential it is being wasted right now until he plays for someone who knows how to teach and utilize a post player.

The bulking up hurting your shot is like an old wife's tale from the 70's. Unless you're in the Mr Universe pagent strength only helps your shot. What he's lacking is confidence. In pregame he didn't miss and I mean that literally. If he missed a three in warmups I missed it and then he airballed his three in the game. Success breeds success & unfortunately that works in reverse. I sat 15 rows up last night and watched most interactions between Miles & players coming out. I couldn't hear him raising his voice from where I was (people must have a different definition of screaming than I'd do.) and not once did I see him wearing a Bo Pelini face. I saw some intensity at times but he was never close to being out of control. If you want to see people explode, go watch Coach K, Roy Williams or Iszo.

That's why he started it. Oh, I know. I should have said, "I hate that it's appropriate that this thread exists." My point was that it is not appropriate that this thread exists. Knee jerk over reactions, both positive and negative, seems to be a common theme in all segments of American society.

That's why he started it.

I remember a different team in 13-14 than you do. There was the same angst going on that year at this time for their early season failures. I thought the offense was just as ugly then as it was in 14-15 but then in conference play Petteway made a higher percentage of his tough shots, Pitchford got hot down the stretch and the ball going in the hoop covers a lot of ugly. I thought at times this year have been the best the offense has looked in his tenure, but certainly not consistently. I remember your posts two years ago discussing those issues and appreciate your perspective. What do you think needs to be done to make this team better? Sorry if I am asking you to re-post your thoughts. I do not always have time to read all threads. Completely different problems/team this year. I thought at that time it was apparent we had some attitude and chemistry issues that could potentially blow the season up before it really got started. I think Leslie Smith didn't get near enough credit for his off the court importance of holding that team together. I think you saw many of those issues resurface last year when the shots stopped falling. It really looked to me that Pitchford quit the team a long time before he he officially left. This team doesn't show any obvious signs of chemistry problems but you never really know what's happening in the locker room unless you're there.