NUdiehard

I agree that we need talented pieces that fit together (gel) to be successful, and we clearly don't have that. But where is all this "top level" talent you speak of? Just because guys like Walker and Edwards were highly ranked out of HS doesn't mean they are top level talent. Those recruiting rankings were misses. Bryce is talented but he is a freshman. There are very, very few freshman who come in and carry a power 5 team, and Bryce is not one of them. He could be that by his Jr. or Sr year (maybe even as a sophomore), but he won't be here that long. Verge is a spaz and a headcase and the most undisciplined defensive player I've ever seen in my life. I know that Robin said Verge had some guarantee of a 2-way NBA contract but that is rubbish. No way any pro team guaranteed him anything, that is probably something Verge (or his "camp") told Robin and Robin just took their word. Walker is nothing close to a 4 start talent, even though his HS rankings said he was. I could go on. Once the players have played in college the recruiting rankings are meaningless, we can all just use our eyes and brains to determine if they truly are top level talent.

So Smith is 1-10 in the Pac12 this year. I guess he forgot how to coach too!

I also stated that another strategy is to only allow Matt A to scout/evaluate appox. 3 of the 7 recruits. The other assistants and Fred would scout/evaluate the remaining 4 recruits. Its not that complicated. As for Parker Friedrichsen (the guard from Oklahoma), he is one of the reasons I am in favor of giving Fred 5 years. Say what you want about how the relationship started, but it clearly has developed and matured to a point that Parker seems almost a lock to come to NU if Fred is retained. I would not feel nearly so confident if Fred is fired. He is a top 100 recruit and a very skilled player, yet probably not good enough to go to the NBA anytime soon. He is the exact type of player we need in the program. I feel similarly about many of the 2022 recruits. So my position in a nutshell. Fred/Matt A have failed miserably in their recruiting the first 2 years. The third year (this year's class), was a bit better but still not good enough. I do think Wilhelm can develop into a very solid B1G level player by his Jr./Sr years. And let's remember, he will be a freshman next year b/c of his injury. Add in Wilcher and Tominaga as role player 3-point specialist. They are not great, and probably not starter quality, but can be rotation players on a good team by their Jr./Sr. years. The 2022 class is where I believe Matt A really stepped up his game. Ramel Lloyd has a massive offer list, including Kansas, Oregon, etc. He is very athletic and looks to have some of that "dog" in him. Washut recently said that Jamarques Lawrence is playing so well he will be in the top 150 soon. Keita hopefully is a legit big man. And although Dawson is a wildcard, but he has good length and is athletic, and Fred has already said he plays with passion and energy (dives on the floor, etc). We also are still in play for some very solid recruits like Avery Brown, who would the perfect PG IMO. Matt A may not be able to reel him in, but he at least has a decent shot. So in short, I see considerable improvement. I could be wrong. All these future recruits could be busts just like the past couple years. But I am just going off what I read/watch/hear and that is why i am willing to give them more time.

I still am not sure what you are trying to say. All I am saying is there is place for Matt A to remain on staff but have a reduced role on recruiting. For instance, let's say up to this point Matt A has been primarily responsible for both scouting (both in person and watching film), evaluating, and recruiting (call, texting, etc) virtually every recruit (so if there are 7 new players Matt A did all three duties for 6 or 7 of those 7 new recruits). Why can't Fred just restructure things so that Matt A must share scouting and evaluation duties. For instance, either Matt A only scouts/evaluates 3 of the 7 new recruits. Or, even better, if Matt A scouts/evaluates a recruit he really likes, he must then bring in one or 2 other assistant coaches to scout/evaluate both live and film, and of course Fred should be involved in this process as well. If there is a consensus among all the coaches that this is a recruit that can thrive in Fred's system, then Matt A can go on to the third step of recruiting him (calling, texting, etc). If there is not a consensus, then either Fred makes the final decision or they have some other form of tie-breaker, such as at least 2 of the 3 assistant coaches must approve of pursuing that recruit. Let's say Matt A's greatest strength is developing a report with recruits, getting to know their families, and getting that recruit to trust him. That is a strength that not every assistant coach has. Why throw this away simply because he missed on scouting/evaluating some previous recruits? Why not just reduce his role in scouting/evaluating and free him up to do what he does best which is recruiting. For instance, maybe a different assistance scouts/evaluates 3 recruits (Matt A had nothing to do with the scout/evaluation process of these recruits), but then that assistant asks Matt A to recruit those recruits (call them, text them, meet the family), etc. This is teamwork. Each coach utilizing their strengths. Simply because Matt A has been poor in scouting/evaluating some past recruits doesn't mean Fred has to get rid of him completely.

You have said this a couple of times now. Do you have any proof of this? How do you know this as a fact?

Pretty ironic that so many choose coaching and specifically reference how Doc Sadler got so much out of his "mighty mites" when Doc Sadler is literally on this staff right now. The answer is talent and its not even close. Does anyone really believe Fred's "scheme/system" cannot work if it has the right collection of players to run it? Seriously? And as for coaching, apparently when Fred went to 4 straight NCAA appearances and a sweet sixteen that was purely by happenstance. Fred's coaching had nothing to do with it. In fact, those players got there in spite of Fred and his massive incompetence. Amazing!

You (and others) have said this before and I have no idea what it means. Seems what your saying is that since Matt A has been responsible for most of the recruiting up to this point, it is impossible for him to have a reduced role and only be responsible for "part" of the recruiting going forward? Not sure I follow the logic of this take.

Walker battles and gives great effort, but he only had 1 rebound the entire game. He only had 3 RBs vs. Rutgers. He is not close to his listed 6'9" (probably closer to 6'7") and is massively undersized. In comparison, Andre had 4 rebounds in just 14 minutes of playing time. I was okay with not playing Verge down the stretch because he was reverting to his constant one-on-one attempts in the lane that weren't even touching rim. Tougher call on whether to play Trey down the stretch. Trey is a very good defender, but man he just is not giving anything on offense (also had 3 turnovers). Not only does he not score, but his man can play off him which clogs the lane. In contrast, Keisei was playing well and hit the 3 which forces the defender to play him tight at all times, thereby opening the floor for Bryce to drive. NU was on absolute disaster to start the 2nd half (when Trey was in the game) and then NU went on its 17-2 second half run while Trey was on the bench, so can see why Fred rolled with him. But I do agree, at a minimum, I would have liked to see some offense defense substitutions during the last 2 minutes. it is tricky with just one timeout though, so hard to know when to deploy this strategy.

Seems the biggest areas of need next year are point guard and power forward. Point guard is a huge massive hole. Have to imagine they are looking once again to the transfer portal to try and fill this, but they have to hit better than in years past. Would be awesome to snag Avery Brown, but there just hasn't been much chatter on him lately so hard to know where we stand at this point. As for power forward, if Lat does not return the only player on next year's roster that even comes close to a PF is Wilhelm, and he is more of a hybrid 4/5. I worry about his lack of quickness limiting his ability to guard the 4, and he is going to need to improve his 3-point shot if he wants to be a consistent PF. Wilcher has been playing some PF this year, but it obviously is not ideal. NU has enough trouble on the boards and playing so small does not help. This means Fred may have to look to the transfer portal for a PF. With that said, I wouldn't completely rule out Lat returning. Not sure if this would be good or bad, but he is very close with Trey. If Trey returns, it is possible Lat returns as well. I will be surprised if Keon returns, but he admittedly is in a tough spot since he has already transferred once and would have to sit out a year if he transfers again. We obviously have not seen Oleg play at all, but based on what little I have watched from him in warm-ups, I don't see him ever being a factor in the B1G. If Walker returns, we will have Walker, Andre, Keita and Wilhelm at center, not sure we need Oleg as well. Even if Wilhelm plays the 4, we still don't need 4 centers, especially considering Wilhelm can play the 5 if we need an extra 5.

I'm not sure where either of them would go if they don't return. Neither will get a sniff at the NBA. Maybe one/both is ready to be done with basketball, or give a shot overseas, but if they really want to play ball their best bet it to return.

Well that should be the end of Kobe yapping his gums on the radio.

Kobe on radio bagging other players for not doing little things like box out then gives up rebound by not boxing out

Kobe came back in and Baker goes right at him

Walker only has 1 rebound. Trey leads team with 7. Wilcher has 5

Huskers have 11 offensive rebounds Rutgers has 3

Kobe is 0-9 on FG with 1 assist and 2 TOs

There is no exact science for determining the "talent" level on a team. Recruiting rankings are often used as a proxy for "talent", but I think by now we all know that recruiting rankings are in inexact science at best. But using recruiting rankings to predict talent form high school recruits is one things--using them to predict talent of transfers is another IMO. Once a player has played at least one year in college, that player's one year of college experience should trump any previous recruiting rankings when trying to project that player's true talent and "potential" to be a difference maker. Now, it can be difficult if the transfer only had one year of college and didn't get much playing time--but isn't the fact the player didn't get much playing time "indicative" of his talent to at least some measure. Of course, we may have to dig deeper into the talent ahead of him on his former team, but still, if a player didn't play it's almost certainly because there were numerous other player's ahead of him on the roster. Another reality of "most" (not all of course) transfers is that most of them are transferring because of lack of playing time. Again, not all, but the vast majority of player's transferring from power 5 schools (I am not talking about players at lower level transferring up ala Kobe Westers) to other power 5 schools usually were not satisfied with their playing time/experience and want a new start. Knowing this, it doesn't seem accurate to assess an incoming transfer based on their recruiting rankings. The very fact that player had limited playing time should automatically reduce those rankings or possibly invalidate them completely. For instance, Lat Mayen was a 4* recruit coming out of Australia. But in 2 seasons at TCU he was a redshirt his first year (which indicates he wasn't good enough to contribute to winning at all as a freshmen) and in his 2nd year he averaged 2.1 pts and 1.2 rebounds before getting injured. Does this sound like a legitimate 4* recruit? Of course not, and it would be silly knowing this to assess him as a true 4* talent once he transferred to NU. Similarly, Keon Edwards was ranked as high as 41 by ESPN and a 4* (top 80 recruit) by rivals out of high school, yet he saw almost no playing time while at Depaul. I realize there are extenuating circumstances with the Covid year, but if Edwards was truly an elite talent, it seems he would have garnered some playing time and production while there. I think we all now see that he is not truly a top 50 recruit and is probably closer to a 2* than a 4* when it comes to actual ability to play at the power 5 level. I know there are exceptions. such as James Palmer and Terran Petteway who had modest numbers at their previous school, but these seem to be more the exception than the rule. My point is I think there is a higher chance of getting a "hit" on a highly ranked recruit if that recruit is right out of HS as opposed to a transfer (unless that transfer has already put up very impressive numbers at a previous power 5 school). The HS recruit may not be a program changing player his freshmen year, but hopefully there will be enough indications of "talent" that can continue to grow and develop as he matures and gets stronger--ala Wilhelm Briedenbach. Wilhelm unfortunately got injured, but he was not going to be a program changer THIS year. But there are indications he could develop into a very solid piece over the next 4 years. Fred did not bring in many highly ranked high school recruits during his first 3 years. We all know he prioritizes transfers. BUT, he has started to recruit more highly ranked HS recruits, especially with next year's class. This is a big reason why I am much more in favor of retaining Fred than most. This is a change in recruiting strategy, and I would like to see Fred have the chance to play it out. Do I wish he would have pulled in more highly ranked HS kids in his first 3 years? Of course. But this is a sunk cost. Let's give him a chance with the young HS recruits. Robin Washut recently tweeted "2022 Nebrasketball signee JLawrence10 is going to be firmly entrenched in the final Rivals150 when all is said an done. Book it." 2022 SF Ramel Lloyd (4 star) is receiving all kinds of accolades and his "offer" list included schools like Kansas, Arizona, Baylor, Illinois, Arizona State, USC, Oklahoma St., etc. Frankly, I believe that is one of the most impressive "offer" list of any HS recruit I've ever seen at NU. Denim Dawson is already on campus and impressing Fred with his energy, athleticism and hustle, all of which are greatly needed with this roster construction. Then you sprinkle in a big man like Keita and maybe a transfer or two to complement the young recruits, and we may have something to look forward to. Are they guaranteed to pan out. Of course not. But it seems crazy to me to switch course now knowing that Fred has made the necessary pivot and its bringing in some talented HS recruits who change the trajectory of the program for many years to come.

I do believe assistant coaches matter. And I agree Miles was much better with Craig Smith here. But a few things don't hold up in that argument with Fred. Based on my quick review, Otzelberger coached at ISU with McDermott for 4 years and they were not very successful (if Otzelberger is so great, why did McDermott struggle?). He then was with Fred for 3 of Fred's 5 years at ISU. But then Otzelberger left after the 2012/13 season, and it was the following 2 seasons that were Fred's best seasons. In 2013/14 ISU was 28-8 and went to the sweet 16. In 2014/15 ISU was 25-9 and tied for 2nd in the Big 12 conference (his highest conference ranking in all 5 years). And even if Otzelberger was a factor in his first 3 years, that just shows Fred can get it done with the right pieces in place. I still would like to see him get a new assistant or two after this season. Frost got the chance to revamp his staff. Fred should get the same. The suggestion that Fred completely forgot how to coach in college basketball between 2015 and now is ludicrous to me. He proved he could win year after year after year at ISU. It isn't like it is now 30 years later and he is a 70 year old man who lost his way. He came here in 2019 just 4 years removed from last being at ISU and going 25-9 and finishing 2nd in the Big 12. He has proven he can win in a power 5 conference. No other coach in Nebraska basketball history can say that.

For me, this is the wrong standard to assess. The question is not can a different coach win 4 games in the BIG rather than 2 (or 0 or whatever). The question is can the coach take this program to a point that it is a semi-regular contender for the NCAA tourney and occasionally wins a game or two in the tourney. That is the standard that any coach should be measured by. I will happily trade these 3 crappy, crappy seasons if in years 5 and 6 Fred has a NCAA tourney level team and therefore a foundation to keep that rolling into the future. Heck, I will even sacrifice next year again if we can reach that point in year 5. Maybe its because I have been doing this for 45 years now that whether its 2 conference wins or 7 conference wins if its not ever resulting in the NCAA or at least high level NIT then what's really the difference? Sure, watching a 7 win team is better than a 4 win team, but either way NU is playing day 1 in the B1G tourney and not even sniffing NCAA tourney. The past 3 years are now a sunk cost. Keeping or firing Fred will not change that. The question is what/who gives NU the best chance of being a tourney level team by year 2024. I will roll the dice on Fred because he has proven he can do it while coaching in a power 5 conference. He may need to make some adjustments to his staff, recruiting philosophy, scheme, etc., to adjust to Nebraska and the B1G. Fine. Give him time and see what he does. If NU is still at the bottom of the B1G after year 5 then he is a goner and we can play this charade all over again with some no-name mid-major coach. The logic of many is confusing IMO. Here are the facts: 1. Fred Hoiberg - coached a power 5 school for 5 years (prior to NU) and went to the NCAA tourney 4 of those 5 years and the sweet 16 in one of those years. 2. Nebraska basketball program - Has only been to 1 NCAA tourney in the last 20 years (despite 4 different coaches) and has NEVER won a single game in the NCAA tourney. 3. CONCLUSION of the masses - the problem clearly lies with Fred and not the Nebraska program. Uh, OK.

Bump My post is on page 3 dated February 12, 2021:

Those who listen to Sipple on the radio will understand that even though I disagree with Sipple (and most on this board apparently) my title is made in good fun. I reference Sipple because he has been critical of Fred and many believe Sipple is the mouthpiece of the AD. I hope that is not the case this time, but if it is, then I disagree with Trev and most of this board regarding what should be Hoiberg's future status with this program. Fred took over this moribund program and should have at least 5 years to try and turn it around. Period. Have the past 3 years been pathetic. Absolutely. Has this season been almost unbearable/unwatchable Yes. Is it 100% guaranteed next year and the year after will be significantly improved? No. But Fred has proven himself. He has won big time in a big time conference. Something no other coach in Nebraska history has done. So he deserves the chance to prove he can do it here as well, and that means he must have at least 5 years. The reason I say 5 years is because it is only in the 5th year of a coaches career that the coach has all his players including 4 and 5 year seniors on the roster. I would say the same for most any coach, and definitely for a proven commodity like Hoiberg. It is clear this board and most fans have completely soured on Fred. For those who have been on this board for many, many years, you will know that I can be quite critical of coaches and I made it clear when I thought Collier should go and when Doc should go, and I was sometimes in the minority in those positions because many wanted to retain them longer and see if they could turn it around. I was ambivalent about Miles. I did not think Miles would ever get it done here, but this program is so pathetic I questioned whether Moos could get anyone better so I was ambivalent (although leaning towards firing him and taking a shot with someone else). Had I known they could get Fred as a replacement it would have not been a question at all. I believe the fundamental difference between my thinking most on this board is that I think the main issue facing the Huskers is talent. More correctly, it is experience (in the Husker program) and talent, as opposed to coaching. Are there coaching issues I take umbrage with? Yes, and I have voiced some on this board. But the MUCH, MUCH bigger issue is experienced talent. And if talent is the issue, then I believe in Fred more than any other two-bit mid-major coach we might hire to bring in that talent over the next few years. In fact, I think we are already seeing that with the recruits coming in next year. Look at who Fred beat out to land Ramel Lloyd-Neither Collier, nor Doc nor Miles ever beat out a who's who for a high school recruit like that. This doesn't even count McGowens (which I know is another issue, but I will address later). Tack on Keita (who appears to be a legit big man), and the others, and it is a very solid class (I believe ranked in the top 25). Will they all pan out? Probably not. Will it actually be a top 25 class in talent on the court? I don't know. But it has as much chance as any IMO. As for Bryce, I know Norm is so fed up he says he never wants any more 5 stars and just wants gutsy, hard working 3 stars who stay in the program and develop. Fine. Isn't that exactly what Fred it doing? How many 5 stars has he recruited in his 3 years here? Oh ya, just one. Unless I am mistaken, the Husker roster currently has SEVEN freshman (all 3 or 4 star players) on the roster. This includes Dawson, (who is already on campus) but does not include the other 3 players in next years class (2 will be freshman and one will be a sophomore). One silver lining is Wilhelm should get a medical redshirt this year and he is a perfect type of 5 year player who can develop into an impact player but is not good enough to go pro early. If everyone stays (and yes, I know that will not happen). next year's roster could have 6 freshman (Wilhelm, McPherson, Dawson, Lloyd, Lawrence and Oleg) and potentially 4 sophomores (Andre, Wilhelm, Edwards and Keita). Some may not return, but there spots may be filled with more freshman or sophomores. Based on how things are going, it is possible (admittedly not likely) that Bryce and /orTrey return. Has Bryce been perfect this year? Clearly not. Does he need to get bigger, tougher and more focused on defense? Absolutely? Would it be good to get another year of development from him? I certainly think so. But even if he doesn't return, as shown above, Fred has a lot of youth on this roster. Andre has his warts. He is very raw and makes mistakes. But he didn't start playing basketball until he was 15 years old. And because of the Covid year, he is still just a freshman. He is the perfect type of 5 year development big man along with Wilhelm, and then throw in Keita as just a sophomore next year. Wilcher is athletically limited, but he can be a very good 3 point shooter which his important in today's game. Again, another development guy. Now, on the pressing question. Why do I think most of this year's issues are players/talent and not coaching. Well, first, it just is apparent to me every game that we are outclassed in size and athleticism. Would anyone argue with that? The other deficiencies are toughness, focus and discipline. Now, you say these are all coaching issues right? Well, maybe. But let's dig deeper. I argue that toughness and grit/dog are as much a skill that some have more difficulty learning than others. For instance, Wilhelm played with grit and hustle every second he was on the floor. Yet he was just a freshman. Then there are guys like Bryce who don't even think about diving on the floor or getting physical on defense. Both freshman, both in the program the same amount of time, but different outcomes (and I have even made the comparison of Bryce to his own brother who plays with grit by nature). Same nurture, different nature. Not all humans have that "dog" in them, and sometimes all the coaching in the world has trouble bringing this out. Another example--Fred said that Dawson in just his first few days of practice dove on the floor more than other players all year. Fred was obviously applauding this effort, so clearly he encourages it in his players. But here we have a true freshman who didn't need any coaching, he just does it because it is his nature. We heard similar things about McPherson. And I'm guessing Keita has plenty of "dog" in him. Last year Nebraska had a top 40 defense when adjusted for tempo. This year's defense is horrendous. Is Fred different? Or have the players changed (including the loss of Trey who is the by far the best defender on the team). To use this year as justification for an argument that Fred can never have a good defense is ludicrous when he did just last year. The Big Ten has been absolutely brutal from top to bottom for each year Fred has been here. Is it the reality he must overcome? Absolutely. But is it fair to compare Fred's record to Doc's when he coached in the Big 12? Or even each of Miles seasons. Please show me a season in Doc's, Collier's or MIles career where every other team in the conference was ranked in top 100-EVERY SINGLE ONE. Those coaches always had a couple teams that were terrible to clip a few easy wins. I posted on this board in February of last year that I did not think Nebraska would be good this year because Fred did not have sufficient talent to win this year. Many argued with this, but it was apparent to me. Not a coaching issue. A talent issue. Now, I did acknowledge that guys like Andre and Wilhelm and Keisei could maybe develop into solid players, but not THIS YEAR. Fred later added a few more recruits like Wilcher and Verge, but once again Wilcher is a freshman (who needs more development) and Verge is, well, Verge. I also posted last February that because of this, Fred needed to evaluate his staff and not be so reliant on Matt A. Again, I took crap for this at the time, but it seemed pretty apparent at the time. Regarding Matt A., he is taking a lot of crap on this board lately. Some justified. But some are saying he must go. Not sure I understand. Can he be, should he be, the sole recruiter? Absolutely not (again, I said this last February). But this doesn't mean he has to be fired. First, Fred has to be more involved in evaluating, recruiting, etc. And then I believe he needs to get one or two more recruiting assistants to compliment Matt A, not necessarily replace Matt A. With that said, this assumes there are not other issues that justify firing Matt A. If he has blatantly gone out of bounds on other issues, then that is a different matter, I am just addressing the recruiting issue. I'm guessing those who pull out the "NBA" quotes/issues probably never watch the NBA. Those who follow the NBA closely know that there are soooo many issues beyond coaching. Roster issues, team construction, rebuilding, etc. far outweigh coaching acument. Heck, many NBA coaches today are instructed to lose so they get good draft picks. And quoting Jimmy Butler, please? That guy was a malcontent on Minnesota and Sixers and pretty much every team he has been on except maybe the Heat. Last, if you fire Fred, who are you going to get? Please spare me the latest hot and up-and-coming coach. Whoever that is, he ain't coming here. It was a miracle we got Fred. Fire him after 3 or 4 years and the already small pool shrinks even further. So shut up Sipple! You have been kissing Frost's *ss for 4 years now. Give Fred time. Give him his 5 years and let's see where we are then.

and he has pee’d his pants every single time.

I would be interested to see the KenPom end of year rankings for NU for the past 15-20 years if anyone has the time/willingness to look them up.

Hmmmm https://omaha.com/sports/huskers/mens-basketball/shatel-fred-hoiberg-is-1-000-motivated-to-turn-nebraska-around-but-can-he-get/article_d0d96d5c-74d8-11ec-8ee6-dbe0164d5c63.html#tncms-source=login

Although there are coaching issues I see (and I have pointed some out in previous posts), I do believe the much bigger issue is a talent problem. For instance, the defense this year is TERRIBLE. We all know that. But just last year (same coaches), NU had a good (if not very good) defense. NU finished in the top 40 in adjusted defensive efficiency just last year. Did they all completely forget how to coach in one off-season? Coaching is important. It is crucial. But there are some players that either simply are not coachable, or just don't have that "dog" in them. A coach can try to bring it out, but some players either take years, or just don't have it. Look no further than Trey and Bryce. Same family. Same upbringing. One player (Trey) is an absolute dog on the defensive end. One player (Bryce), well let's just say he is NOT a dog (to put it nicely--no reason to pile on). Look at Wilhelm, he is a freshman so he had almost no college coaching. He is not the athlete of the others, but he played his butt off every minute he was on the floor. He dove for lose balls. He played physical. He had a high motor. He already understands the level of effort it takes in the B1G, while guys with years of experience do not. Playing hard is a talent as much as a developed skill, and some guys have that talent and some don't. Playing disciplined is also a talent as well as a skill. Look at Verge. He is in his 5th year of college ball. He has been under other college coaches for years. And he still lacks discipline on the defensive end. He also lacks consistency. Did all the coaches at ASU not know how to coach, as well as Fred. Or is this more a Verge issue than a coaching issue? Wilcher plays hard, but he is slow as molasses. That is not his fault, it just is who he is. Walker tries hard, but he is too short/small to be a dominant defensive big man in the B1G. The main reason I am in favor of keeping Fred is because it appears he has begun to increase the talent level of recruiting, especially with next year's class. I want to see what he can do with better