NUdiehard

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

I have seen this notion that Fred "lack's passion" because of his sideline demeanor often on this board and I completely disagree. Fred is an intense competitor. He didn't get to where he is as a player and a coach without being incredibly competitive. He just has a certain style on game days. It is more in line with the NBA where coaches don't flap their arms and jump up and down. Look at Brad Stevens, he never changes expression. Same with Erik Spoelstra of Miami Heat--one of the most fiercely competitive teams in NBA year in and year out. I could go on and on. I am close enough to the floor to see veins bulging in Fred's forehead, even though his overall "demeanor" would never show it (especially from upper levels). I have seen Fred throw his clip board on the floor and at the bench in disgust. I guarantee you he is boiling inside. Personally, I wish he would get on players more during games. But I do know there are many coaches who believe you do the "yelling" all week during practice, and not during the games. If that is his philosophy, that is fine. It certainly isn't what is keeping this team from winning.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe Fred is the only Nebraska coach who has ever had NCAA success (tournament wins) while coaching in a power 5 conference. In fact, he may the only coach in NU history that won a NCAA tourney game (is this right?), including before, during or after coaching at NU. My memory may be off, but I am pretty sure that neither Doc nor Collier ever won a single NCAA tourney game while coaching UTEP and Butler (both non power 5 schools BTW). Hoiberg coached at ISU for 5 seasons and went to the NCAA tourney 4 straight years, winning 4 NCAA tourney games (tied all time for most by ISU coaches). From Huskers.com: Hoiberg led a resurgence at his alma mater, leaving a lasting legacy in five seasons. He guided Iowa State to a 115-56 record – including a 99-40 mark in his final four seasons – to post the top winning percentage (.673) in Cyclone history. Hoiberg led Iowa State to a program-record four consecutive NCAA Tournament appearances, while tying the school record with four NCAA Tournament coaching victories. Hoiberg also posted the top conference winning percentage (.557) in ISU history and guided Iowa State to back-to-back Big 12 Tournament titles in 2014 and 2015. His 115 wins were the most by any coach in a five-year span in Iowa State history. After a 16-16 debut season, Hoiberg led the Cyclones to a 23-11 record and the third round of the 2012 NCAA Tournament. ISU went 12-6 in Big 12 play in Hoiberg’s second season, winning nine more conference games than the previous season to post the biggest one-year turnaround in Big 12 history. Hoiberg was named the Big 12 Co-Coach of the Year for his efforts. Hoiberg guided the Cyclones to another 23-win season in his third year, when Iowa State advanced to the third round of the NCAA Tournament for the second straight year. In his fourth season, the Cyclones finished 28-8, won the 2014 Big 12 Tournament and advanced to the Sweet 16. In Hoiberg’s final season, Iowa State defended its Big 12 Tournament title and earned a No. 3 seed for the NCAA Tournament. I have been going to games for 45 years and yes, these past 3 years have been rough. And this year has been brutal. But get a grip! I said this when Fred was hired and I will keep saying it--If Fred can't get it done here, NOBODY can! At least nobody that would ever be stupid enough to come coach at this moribund coach-killer program. I said in February of last year that Fred needed to bring in some additional "recruiters" as assistant coaches. I said this because I did not believe the players he was bringing in for this season were of sufficient quality to win in the B1G. I took a ton of crap for it at the time, but it was clear to me then and now it is clear that Fred has been too reliant on Matt A. for all the recruiting. Fred needs to become more personally involved in the scouting and evaluation of recruits, and he needs to get in one or two more ace recruiters to supplement the recruiting efforts. Fred should have 5 years minimum. And I personally would give him 7 years minimum. Call me crazy. But even with as bad as things are now, I will roll the dice with Fred at the helm over any unknown coach that would follow him. No proven coach is going to come here, especially not after a very well respected coach like Fred gets fired after just 3 years.

Verge was very good on offense last night, about as well as we can expect him to run the point. His defense is still way too undisciplined, needs to shore that up. I was rooting for every single TSU 3 pointer to go in because that is the only way this coaching staff is going to realize you can't leave the opponent WIDE OPEN from 3 time and time and time again. I think Fred answered his own question as to why his team shoots well in practice--it's because they are playing against themselves. Almost any college player can shoot well from 3 when left wide open. As many have mentioned, the PF spot is a problem right now. I don't know if Lakes is the answer (in his limited minutes so far he has not been any better) but I would like to see him start and get 25+ minutes vs. SD just to see what he can do when getting consistent minutes. Hard to imagine he could do any worse, and a one game experiment is warranted at this point. Walker has been great in these past few games. I just really question whether he will be able to do that in conference. He is too short and those "easy" looks he is getting now may be swatted into the 3rd row in conference. I hope I am wrong, but I just don't see that being sustainable. And his lack of size will be exposed on defense and rebounding. Andre has his deficiencies, no doubt about it, but I think Fred is going to regret not getting him more experience against these lower level team when he discovers how important his rim protection is in conference. Time will tell. Keisei is showing there is a huge difference shooting in juco than in Div 1, and we are even in conference play yet. With that said, I still think there are going to be a few games where he catches fire and knocks down 3, 4 or 5 threes in a row to give a spark. This team does not play hard. They have no idea how to bust tail every second of every game. Not sure if they can "learn" this skill or they just don't have it in them, but it is disappointing to watch game after game.

My post was meant to be a bit humorous but also probably was a bit harsh to Doc (and whoever else is coaching the defense). I agree that we have some poor one-on-one defenders. We also have a couple defenders (hate to pick on Verge and Bryce) who are terribly undisciplined. And I agree that Walker is undersized in the post. This will never be a great defensive team because of our personnel. But I challenge anyone to go back and watch the Creighton game and the Idaho St. games and not be appalled at the wide open looks they got from 3. Andre is raw, has poor body language and tries to do too much on offense. BUT, he is 6'11" and has long arms and it a true legit rim protector. If Doc (or Fred) or whoever, could convince him to just play his role, and defend and rebound and not try to be an offensive focal point, he can be a disruptor in the paint. Starting him at 6'11" (and long) and Lat at 6'9" and Bryce at 6'7" and Edwards at 6'7" is hardly what I would call a small team. They just need to be more disciplined, and need to run the opponent off the 3 and trust Andre to be a disruptor in the paint. I would at least like to try it. My primary frustration is I have seen this movie before with this coaching staff. I can't remember if it was last year or 2 years ago, but I distinctly remember teams constantly going off from 3 on us early in the season, and then I distinctly remember Hoiberg acknowledging they changed the defense to take away more 3s--AND IT WORKED. The defense got much better. After that, I assumed (hoped?) that would solve this for good. But here we are, right back where we started with Doc's over-packed defense. I am not saying a packline defense can't ever work, but whatever version this is is too pack line. It is too much commitment to the paint and not enough to the 3. Good teams will destroy us from 3 if we keep this up (Look at Creighton, and they aren't even that good a shooting team). I want Fred to make the adjustment now so the players can adjust and Doc can tinker against these lower level teams.

Dear Doc, We here in Nebraska think you are a great guy. You are funny, witty, goofy and look and walk like a penguin. And for the most part, you're a pretty good coach too. But we also know that growing up in the south you probably spent more time in the gym than in math class, so we want to help you out a bit. This piece of knowledge could radically change your life, and possibly even extend your coaching career 10-20 years (if you want to keep going that long anyway). So, this is a bit complex, involving numbers and all, but here it is: Three is greater than two. I realize this may not click all at once. It is a lot to take in. But let it simmer for a while. Let it ruminate in your mind. Draw the numbers on the chalkboard and see if starts to clarify in your mind. It will take a while, but I believe with perseverance, you can get it. Okay, now I am going one step farther. We are going to advanced mathematics here, and you may never fully being able to grasp this, but it still has to be explained: Not only is 3 > 2, but it is 50% greater than 2. Let me put it another way since you didn't pay enough attention in math class: 3 is 1.5 times as much as 2. This means it take three 2s to equal two 3s. Whoa! Mind blown, right? But it's true. So this means, when the opposing team makes those WIDE OPEN 3s that your defense gives them, they are getting 50% more points than if they would otherwise have made a difficult contested 2 in the paint. Crazy thought, isn't it? So here a couple little small helpful tips we here in Nebraska would like to offer: (1) When the opponent parks one of their best shooters on the weak side corner, rather than having the Nebraska player who is guarding that shooter go ALL THE WAY TO THE MIDDLE OF THE PAINT, maybe, just maybe, keep him a little closer to the shooter, so that when the opponent swings the ball to the weak side (or drives and kicks, or throws a skip pass, or uses their big man to block the defender from getting back out to his man), the Nebraska player will actually be able to get back to his man and contest the shot. Because remember, the 3 is worth 50% more than a 2. And the corner 3 is a shorter shot than the top of the key 3. (2) Just because the opponent may occasionally drive the ball into the paint, or throw and entry pass into the paint, doesn't mean you have to send ALL 5 NEBRASKA DEFENDERS into the paint as well. In fact, you don't even need to ALWAYS double team that post entry. Believe it or not, sometimes your players can man up and defend one-on-one. You should let them try it sometime and see how it works. Especially when the opponent's big catches the ball 10 feel from the hoop, you don't really need to send a hard double thereby leaving his man WIDE OPEN for a 3 (which remember, is worth 50% more than the 2 point shot). (3) I know that when you were growing up in the south in the 1970s, you and many other of your friends couldn't make shots farther than 10 feet from the basket. But I have to share a revelation with you. The game has changed. Players today grew up watching Steph Curry, and they like to shoot from 22 feet and beyond. It is all they did all day growing up. Even the big fat plodders on the other team like to shoot that long shot. And believe it or not, they can make it--especially when THEY ARE WIDE OPEN. (4) You don't need to have 4 defenders in the paint AT ALL TIMES. You can actually let some of your off ball defenders guard their guys as well. I know this is radical, but it is true. There is no law that says you must have at least 4 defenders in the paint at ALL TIMES. So, there it is. Life changing knowledge for you to contemplate. If it still isn't clicking, maybe you could ask one of the team tutor's to sit down with you and help you figure it out. I hear some of them are pretty good at advanced mathematics. We believe you can do it, but you have to believe in yourself. It is within you. I know you have not been able to grasp this concept for the entirely of your 40 year coaching career, but we believe even old penguins like you can learn new tricks--even new math tricks. So dig deep, meditate if necessary, and try to pull it out of your inner being. If you can do it, it will change your life---AND change the lives of all of us Nebraska fans who have been pulling out our hair year after year after year watching our opponents shoot WIDE OPEN 3s time and time again. Sincerely, All Nebraska Hoops Fans cc: Fred Hoiberg

We are a poor defensive team this year. But this is the same coaching staff as last year, which had a good defensive team. And as we all know, Doc is the one coaching the defense. We have some slow footed guys like Wilcher, Tominaga and Wilhelm. We have some skinny guys in Verge, Bryce, Edwards. And we have an undersized center in Walker. We also have some guys who simply don't understand the effort it takes every second on the court to be a good defender, and this includes our 5* freshman. As i mentioned in an earlier post, we can't have both guys getting beat on the perimeter and lack a rim protector. Need either one or the other, at a minimum. I don't have a lot of confidence that the perimeter defense will ever be great, so I think we need the rim protection Ed brings just to try and mitigate the easy layups.

Good thoughts. As for the game last night, in that early Creighton run, Verge and Bryce and others tried to attack the rim and Creighton's 7 footer altered all their shots. It took us too long to realize this and adjust. Regarding Walker, I agree he tries hard, but that isn't enough. His problem is that he is only 6'8" (not really tall enough to be a power 5 center) but the only reason he plays center is because he is not skilled enough to play PF. He can't dribble, he can't shoot and he's not even an explosive leaper. So all he can do on offense is pass and make an occasional layup. But the much bigger problem with him is that on defense he isn't a rim protector. Whenever he was in the game, Creighton would just keep attacking the basket and getting easy layups because Walker can't rim protect. And I was even more disappointed to see Creighton's rather gangly big man get such low post position on him multiple times for easy lay-ins. If nothing else, Walker needs to use his strength to keep that guy out of the paint. We were already a poor defensive team going into that game, and now that Trey is out, we are a very poor defensive team. Our guards and wings get beat and the only possible mitigation is having a rim protector to prevent the layup line. Andre is has his flaws. He is very raw and a bit out of control and sometimes try to do too much. But if Fred could get in his head and tell him to just play extremely hard on defense and protect the rim at all costs, rebound and then kick the ball out, he could be effective in his role. At least then teams would not get easy layups all game long. Plus, we may be at the point of punting on this season and just trying to develop guys for the proverbial "next year". Walker is a 5th year senior. Ed is still a freshman. Give the minutes to Ed and let him grow and develop, this season is already lost anyway. I don't have much to add about the PG spot and I don't know what to do about Verge. The most disappointing thing by far is that we are in year 3 with Fred and he failed to get a true PG.

Andre came in and changed the game. His points were nice, but we all realize he won’t score that much most nights. But he altered so many shots in his limited minutes. I know he is raw and I am sure he does things that frustrate Fred, but he has to be a part of the rotation. I know people love Walker, and he is a good leader and plays hard. But he is a very below average center in the B1G. He is a 6’8” center who can’t shoot, can’t dribble and isn’t particularly skilled at anything. Has decent hands, but that’s not enough at this level. He definitely is not a rim protector. With that said, Ed has to do his part to help Fred have more confidence in him. Whatever he is or isn’t doing in practice needs to get sorted out so he can get more PT going forward. Disappointing thing is that if Andre played in the first game NU most likely wins. What was Fred thinking (or not thinking)?

Walker and Ed should not be on the court at the same time. Ever.

I hope I am wrong, but I am already sensing dissension in the ranks. I have been to the practice scrimmage, both exhibitions and the first game, but let's back up even farther. After last season, there was a lot of talk about Trey being the PG this year. In his initial podcasts, he talked about how hard he has been working at PG and how excited he is to take that next step. Then, enters Verge. And suddenly Verge is getting all the hype. And Trey is suddenly seen as more of "role" guy playing the SG. Then the practice scrimmage, where Verge played one-on-one hero ball almost the entire game (much like last night). Trey only shot 1 or 2 shots all night if i recall. Then the first 2 exhibitions. Verge played well and I thought distributed pretty well too. But there were "looks" and "body language" from (and between) Verge, Trey and Bryce that I started to notice. Instances where one of them would call for the ball, and the other would ignore or dismiss it. I distinctly remember late in Colorado game (after Verge had been playing well and getting a lot of attention) that Trey was bringing the ball up and Verge was clapping and yelling for him to pass the ball to him. Trey looked at him and just kept going. I've seen the similar things in reverse, where Verge had the ball and didn't pass to Trey. And let's remember, if Trey is a bit sour that Verge "stole" his PG spot, then that is surely going to rub off on Bryce. And Trey is close to Lat and the other returning players, so if Verge keeps up the "hero ball hog" role, I could see the dissension escalate dramatically. With all this said, I must be clear I don't have any inside or direct info on any of this. This could all be in my imagination. All of this is just reading "tea leaves" and "body language", but it is definitely something to keep an eye on. Clearly the guys did not play as a team last night, and maybe some of this dissension that had been brewing finally came out. Time will tell if they can get it corrected and back on track.

Something to keep in mind. NBA looking to change rules to allow players to go straight to NBA out of high school starting in 2022 or 2023. If Omaha is truly a top 5 recruit unlikely he plays college ball for anyone.

Fred didn’t make make a single defensive substitution on that last defensive possession. How can you leave Webster in on defense with Banton on the bench?

What is the rule regarding loss (or lack thereof) of a year of eligibility for players for this season. I thought ALL players would NOT lose any year of eligibility from this season. In other words, Andre would still be a freshman next year, Yvan would still be a soph, Walker would still be a junior, etc. or is this not correct? Is it only current seniors that don't lose a year? If so, what about a player like Walker who is in his fourth (senior) year of school, but is considered a junior for eligibility because of his redshirt year?

Trey is shooting 33% on 2-point shots in conference. He also has more turnovers (42) than assists (37) for the season. The concern before the season was his inefficiency and that has borne out this season.

This is why I specifically qualified my statement by saying "Danny Nee lock up the state at a time of great Nebraska talent" Almost all those players were during the early 90s , and Nee got them all. After them, the state went through a stretch where there was very little talent. Collier tried to take some Nebraska kids, but they were not very talented and it backfired. I am not interested in taking every mid-major Nebraska kid, but when we have multiple 4* and 5* and guys who are going to Wisconsin, Creighton, Oklahoma State and various blue bloods, all around the same few years, Fred needs to make some inroads on those guys. Whatever it takes. One has to wonder whether taking Teddy hurt his chances with the others. Is Fred courting the Nebraska HS coaches, getting in their good graces? Every action has a reaction. Every decision must be made with the longest view in the room. How does it advantage us and disadvantage us going forward. With all this said, for whatever it is worth, I am still 100% all-aboard the Hoiberg train. I am not in any way, shape or form wanting to move on from him. He is the "golden boy" hire and I am prepared to sink or swim with him 100%. Even after losing 25 straight, If I could force him to sign a 10-year contract in which he couldn't leave and couldn't be fired (meaning he would have to be here the next 10 years no matter what his record), i would do it in a second. Honestly, if Fred can't pull this off here, then it may just be time to pack it in. Some of us have been doing this groundhog day for far too long. I believe Fred can do it, I am just commenting on my observations on the current roster, the current recruits and his current staff. And again, I hope I am wrong about Keisei and Breidenbach, I really do. But if not, then there are going to have to be a few more spots open up and Fred is going to have to bring in a few legit difference maker transfers (ie, Point Guard) if Nebraska is going to compete next year in the B1G.