NUdiehard

Since we are talking about referees, the thing that drives me mad is that refs have no clue what a flop is and how to call it. These guys watch and ref games for a living. It is their livelihood, yet they repeatedly are clueless on the games (and acting) that the players play and they fall for it time and time and time again. Basically, if a player falls down, the refs almost always blow their whistle, and 90% of the time the guy that falls down gets the benefit of the call. It has become absurd. Now, shooters fall down after every shot. Defensive players fall down (or fling their head back) when running around a screen. Offensive players throw their head back if the defender grazes their hip (as if touching your hip makes your head violently sling your head back!?). Certain players do this much more than others, and those that do have their "regular" go to flops game after game after game. Yet the refs are clueless. They fall for it every stinkin time. If I was a ref, the rule would be simple. If you fall down I am not only not going to give you the benefit of the doubt, I am going to assume you flopped unless the contact leading to the fall was so clear and egregious and convincing as to prove that assumption wrong. If all refs did this all the flopping would go away real quick. Why is this so complicated? Frankly it is shocking to me that refs can't figure this out and how can it not make one question their competency?

This is because IU went to zone. For 5 years we have all watched Huskers be completely befuddled by zone.

That was a clear goaltend of Tais shot

Pretty sure new rules allow coaches/teams to share information about the scrimmage after it is done. Didn't Huskers actually post an article about the scrimmage last year with select statistics and everything?

Smith is a lock one-and-done so that won't help us

bball23 did compare our situation to MSU. That was the initial post that I responded to. And as for '13-14, that kind of proves my point. We lost 4 games to name teams and won ALL of our cupcake games. Imagine if we had lost to just one of our non-conf cupcakes. We would not have made the NCAA (or similarly if we had played that 13th game vs. a cupcake and lost it). We just don't have room to lose cupcake games like many other powerhouse teams do. And even if we all know we don't have a great team this year, it is much more fun going into conf. with at least the hope that we could make a run and maybe land on the bubble. Losing to teams like Samford (without any really good upset wins to counter it) almost dashes any hope before the conf. season even starts, and that is a downer and, frankly, is unnecessary. Look, I also did not have grand expectations this year. I knew this was most likely not a tourney team coming into this season. Heck, I was talking about this after the end of last year when we lost Tarin Smith and Pitchford in addition to Petteway. Many on here were claiming we would be even better this year without those guys and I predicted their losses would hurt more than we know. I am not a "sky is falling" person in regards to Miles or even this season. I do not think Miles is on the hot seat nor do I think he should be on the hot seat. Not even close really. I am still a Miles supporter and I really like Roby and have hopes for Horne. Have also heard good things about Gill, but I also think we desperately need a big man, maybe this TAM transfer. As said above, I had pretty low expectations for this year and I am fully aware of our 5 freshman. For me personally, the biggest frustration with the past few weeks has been seeing issues that have seemingly plagued us for the last 2 years, or even last 4 years. Like our press break, or zone offense, the lack of confidence of our role players, etc. I think our quality and style of play has gone down since Craig Smith left, so that is a concern. Many other people have pointed these things out as well, but then they are told they are overreacting to 1 single game. No, its not. If we had been a dominate press breaking team the past 4 years and just had one bad game, then it would be disappointing, but not a big deal. For many frustrated fans, its not about just one game, its about issues that have plagued Miles' teams for the past 2 years or longer. And I guess I think those are fair points to discuss. I disagree with those who couch it in "Miles needs to get it together or else", but I can at least respect their right to feel that way if they want. I certainly won't tell them they are making rash and childish posts based on just 1 game. We are in year 4 and right now Miles has a worse win/loss record that Doc Sadler had at this point, so I think it is just as rash to say people are overreacting to 1 game and compare us to MSU. That is my main point.

We also have to remember the good and the bad. Though we have lost the big ones, we were toe to toe with Cincy and Miami. Very well could have beaten both of them. We have been in games that mean something. We have won two games that were toss ups, and have lost one we really had not business in losing. We are one game from where a lot of people thought we would be sitting at this point in the year. The Big 10 doesn't scare me as much as it did before the season started either. You make a good point, but it actually leads to my last thought on this subject. I actually feel that in many ways, NU basketball games are much like football is some ways in that one game can be a huge difference maker. Especially non-conf cupcake games. Just one loss to a cupcake can be the difference between dancing and not dancing when it comes to NU BB, so let's be honest, every game counts for us. At this stage, Nebraska is not anything like Mich St. or Ohio State, or Wisconsin, or any of those types of teams. We just aren't. If we are going to get into the dance, it is going to be by the hair of our chinny chin chin. NU's margin is razor thin. We all know this, right? Even in '13-14 we were sweating it out until our name was called. I don't have the schedule in front of me, but I don't think we lost to a cupcake in the non-conf. I could be wrong. But imagine if we had lost just one more game in the non-conf to a bad team. We almost certainly would NOT have made it. This simply is our reality and it is why losses like Samford hurt so much. It is just one loss, but for Nebraska one loss could easily be the difference. If we win 9 or 10 games in conf, the NCAA committee is not going to give us the grace it gives powerhouse schools like this mentioned above. We just don't have that luxury. Which again is why I don't understand comparisons to those types of schools, they are not apples to apples and I think we all know it.

Norm, I understand your response to my post. I game it a little more explanation above, but I will elaborate. I just don't understand when people say "it is only one game" when we have played 13 games. I don't think anyone here is making a judgment based on that one game alone. This was my same feeling last year after the Incarnate Word game, which followed the absolutely abysmal game against Creighton, which followed very poorly played games against cupcakes even if we did squeek out a win, which followed the disappointing loss against Rhode Island, which followed the horrid exhibition game where we were losing at halftime. It's not just one game unless that one game is the first and only poor performance of the year. That is what I don't get. If NU was 12-1 (ala Mich St) do you think anyone would would be so disappointed? Honestly? Heck, we would be ranked in the top 10 probably. All I am trying to say is that when it is game 12 or game 13, its not one game. I know you have been doing this a long time, just like I have. I feel like I have reached a point where I can trust my eyes. After 13 games, I feel like I have a pretty good idea of a good (NCAA bubble) team when I see it. I am sure many on here feel the same. If anyone is basing their complete an entire opinion on just that one game, then I agree, that is nonsense. But I don't think that is the case for most posters on this board who watch all the games just as we do. If you and others want to disagree with posters who have a less positive view, that is absolutely fine. I just don't think it should be premised in "its just one game, this isn't football' when it is based on 12 or more games. That is all.

UNO has one starter, maybe two that could start for NU, hyperbole is OWH strong suit. Thurman, Patterson and White could, in theory, all start, though Thurman plays Shields' position, in a sense. That may not be true a few years, but it is right this minute. And Hollins would play some minutes, too. Remember, Hollins and Thurman were part of the greatest HS team in state history. None of them ended up at Nebraska. Or Creighton. Or anywhere else good.Pretty sure Agau's at Georgetown. He was on that team, too.Thurman wasn't any better or worse a HS player than Shields. Maybe they'll shake out differently in college. Thus far, they're about equal. But there's Edward Chang, and we'll see where he goes in a few years. I have 0% doubt in my mind - from all my basketball experience - that Treshawn Thurman and Tradeon Hollins would start for Nebraska. Treshawn is better than Morrow, better than Jacobsen, better than any 4/5 we have on our roster. Tradeon would be an upgrade of Benny's defense, on and off ball, and he can finish at the rim. Our line up of:1. Hollins 2. White 3. Shields 4. Thurman 5. Whatever crap 5 you put in Would be better than any line-up we currently have. These "Central Superstars" have lost to UC Santa Barbara, Eastern Michigan, a BAD Missouri team and a pretty awful Wyoming team. Took powerhouse UMKC to OT at home to win the game. Squeaked out a win over Montana State. OT vs Grand Canyon. Look, maybe individually you can look at a guy and think he is pretty good. But they are losing to a lot of cupcakes. It humors me how many on here will compare these guys when in reality, how good are they really? They may look "decent" vs LOWER level competition, but how the hell do we know they can go night in an night out in the B10? We lost a game we shouldn't have and all hell breaks lose. Oakland just took Michigan State to OT tonight! OAKLAND! Maybe Izzo has lost it? The point is, teams lose games they shouldn't, teams have great nights, teams have awful nights....THAT'S BASKETBALL!! Again, this is NOT football! Its a 32 game marathon, not a 10 game sprint! One team gets hot in basketball and can beat anybody on any given night! Every night I could literally give you an upset of a team that shouldn't have won. Its what makes basketball great! Anything can happen! The key is to try and not get too excited for great wins, and not too down after bad losses. I wondered when "It's only one game! This isn't football!" guy would appear. I distinctly remember you guys last year after the Incarnate Word game telling everyone they were completely overreacting. I wondered when the this season is lost guys would appear one season. It happened really the first few games of conference. I remember telling everyone to calm down, that we were decent, and we could still win some games after that Penn State loss in '13-'14 dropped us to 9-9 (1-5). Just saying that that argument works both ways. Yes, you do have '13-14 on your side. But you must admit, in the last 20 years "the season is lost guys" have been right 95% of the time! Ha. Actually, I am not one who thinks this season is absolutely lost for the record. I am wait and see but not holding my breath. I've been doing this a looong time and I just feel like I know what I see with my own 2 eyes. I will admit '13-14 fooled me, but more often than not when it comes to having a legitimate NCAA type team, "you know it when you see it". We have pieces this year, but we also have some killer holes and it is going to be really tough. Right now, after that brutal loss, I would say we have to win 10 games in conference just to be on the bubble. Do you want to put your money on that happening? That is the problem with losses like that for a team like NU. We simply have no margin for error against lesser teams because we aren't good enough to typically overcome being in such a hole. That is the disappointment. Some of us have been doing this a long, long time and we have seen this deal repeat again and again and again.

UNO has one starter, maybe two that could start for NU, hyperbole is OWH strong suit. Thurman, Patterson and White could, in theory, all start, though Thurman plays Shields' position, in a sense. That may not be true a few years, but it is right this minute. And Hollins would play some minutes, too. Remember, Hollins and Thurman were part of the greatest HS team in state history. None of them ended up at Nebraska. Or Creighton. Or anywhere else good.Pretty sure Agau's at Georgetown. He was on that team, too.Thurman wasn't any better or worse a HS player than Shields. Maybe they'll shake out differently in college. Thus far, they're about equal. But there's Edward Chang, and we'll see where he goes in a few years. I have 0% doubt in my mind - from all my basketball experience - that Treshawn Thurman and Tradeon Hollins would start for Nebraska. Treshawn is better than Morrow, better than Jacobsen, better than any 4/5 we have on our roster. Tradeon would be an upgrade of Benny's defense, on and off ball, and he can finish at the rim. Our line up of:1. Hollins 2. White 3. Shields 4. Thurman 5. Whatever crap 5 you put in Would be better than any line-up we currently have. These "Central Superstars" have lost to UC Santa Barbara, Eastern Michigan, a BAD Missouri team and a pretty awful Wyoming team. Took powerhouse UMKC to OT at home to win the game. Squeaked out a win over Montana State. OT vs Grand Canyon. Look, maybe individually you can look at a guy and think he is pretty good. But they are losing to a lot of cupcakes. It humors me how many on here will compare these guys when in reality, how good are they really? They may look "decent" vs LOWER level competition, but how the hell do we know they can go night in an night out in the B10? We lost a game we shouldn't have and all hell breaks lose. Oakland just took Michigan State to OT tonight! OAKLAND! Maybe Izzo has lost it? The point is, teams lose games they shouldn't, teams have great nights, teams have awful nights....THAT'S BASKETBALL!! Again, this is NOT football! Its a 32 game marathon, not a 10 game sprint! One team gets hot in basketball and can beat anybody on any given night! Every night I could literally give you an upset of a team that shouldn't have won. Its what makes basketball great! Anything can happen! The key is to try and not get too excited for great wins, and not too down after bad losses. I wondered when "It's only one game! This isn't football!" guy would appear. I distinctly remember you guys last year after the Incarnate Word game telling everyone they were completely overreacting.

Barfknecht weighs in on this question. And it does not appear that he believes the talent level is so great as LK1 and many others on this board think: http://www.omaha.com/huskers/barfknecht-improving-talent-level-essential-for-struggling-huskers/article_f5e3e3a2-4054-5aba-a080-c02e752925dd.html EDIT: I see that Dimes beat me to this link

One other coaching issue I have noticed but didn't mention in the OP is our defense when the opponent is inbounding the ball from under the hoop. As much as I can remember, Miles teams have always played man-to-man in defending the inbounds. Maybe this is standard at the college level, but man have we been killed by it time and time again. I challenge anyone to go back and watch the Creighton game and count the number of times CU burned us on inbounds plays from under their own hoop. I seriously think they scored on about 80% of their inbounds plays (and there were a lot of them, probably 10 or so). Most times it was Shields or someone else chasing a guy around 3, 4 or even 5 screens and always getting caught up in traffic only to give him man a wide open 10-15 foot jumper. Why not go zone for inbounds plays? Heck, why not go zone the entire possession whenever they inbounds, it would be a nice change-up anyway. Regrettably, in contrast, I rarely recall Nebraska scoring an easy basket off our inbounds plays.

Wow. Have you seen most of these guys shoot? And your answer is to fire away? Interesting theory. Just curious: Who exactly are "most of these guys"? And your solution is?

This is Miles 4th year now and there are some frustrating tendencies of his teams that now seem to be trends: 1. His teams do not attack the press. In 4 years I can't remember a single time his team has aggressively attacked a press. I would love for the some of the coaching minds (Dean, Jones, etc) to pitch in on this, but I just don't get it. Isn't the greatest risk of the press (and the reason most teams don't press) is it is susceptible to giving up easy baskets by teams that attack it. But Miles teams never get easy baskets off the press because he never attacks it. THIS ALLOWS THE OPPONENT TO GET ALL OF THE BENEFIT/REWARD WITH NONE OF THE RISK of the press. That simply can't happen. the press can help the pressing team in multiple ways, including creating turnovers and, even if it doesn't create a turnover, it can slow the opposing team down so that it is fighting the shot clock each possession. If you don't attack the press, you allow the opposing team to press with total and complete impunity. You allow the opposing team to get all the benefit with absolutely no risk. Blows my mind. 2. When things get tight, Miles takes complete control. Miles says each year that he wants his teams to "just play" and he touts his motion offense with movement, passing, etc. And at times in the non-conference we see some of this. But as soon as things get tight, Miles gets tight and tries to control every aspect of the game. He starts calling sets every single possession. This sometimes works, but as Miles himself has said, sets are easy to scout and therefore easy to defend because the other team knows the plays too. Running sets also allows the opposing defense to always set up its defense (see #1). For instance, one of the reason Miles' teams rarely attack the press is because Miles is calling a set play as soon as we inbound the ball,, this means the guards are not focused on trying to attack the press but rather just get it across half court so they can set up the set play. Usually the set play is for Shields or White, and of course the other team knows that, so they simply guard White and put the other 4 guys in the paint and wait for Shavon to come plowing into them. 3. Players get tight because Miles is tight. Watch Miles in big games. He is super uptight from the opening tipoff. I know that many, many other (often great) coaches are exactly the same way, so I can't say it is wrong. But it just seems to me that when Miles is so worked up and tight, his players often play that way, especially the young players. Yesterday, after Fuller missed a free throw, Miles was screaming at Fuller "Make your free throws Nick!" while he was at the line getting ready to shoot his next one. Isn't this in the duh category. As if Fuller didn't know he was supposed to make his FT or as if he wasn't trying to make them. Fuller was missing those free throws because he was too tight, not too loose. Miles yelling at him for the obvious was not going to help that situation IMO, but I understand other will feel that is perfectly appropriate and Fuller should be called out. I am just looking at player and circumstance and results and seeing the trend. 4. The role players are scared to shoot down the stretch. We have seen this for 4 years now and even though the players have changed, the result has not. The role players are too tight and too nervous to shoot or make something happen late in tight games. Is this just the players or is it the players response to Miles and his coaching? I don't know, but when it happens for 4 years Miles is the one constant. 5. Rotation issues. Just for the record, whenever I discuss players I don't think should be playing as much, it is never intended to be slight towards that player. I appreciate every player that puts on the scarlet and cream and gives his all for the team. But it is impossible to discuss Miles' rotation and minutes distribution and personnel decisions without mentioning the player. I would hope we are all able to understand the difference between the two. With that said, BP simply cannot continue to play the minutes he has been playing. He absolutely stifles the offense. His man simply plays off him, stands in the paint, and waits for Shavon to plow into him. Game after game I look up late in the 2nd half and his line reads 0 points, 0 rebounds 1 assist. This cannot happen at this level. I also don't think he is as good on the defensive end as Miles and many others do, but that is another discussion for another day. BTW, our best rotation last night was with Tai at the point and both Watson and BP on the bench. The team went on an immediate 8-0 run and scored on 4 straight possessions in the first half, but Miles never went back to it. I am still a Miles supporter and still think he is the one for the job. I still think he has upgraded the recruiting (albeit leaving some big holes like center and SG), I think he has marketed the program well and is grinding. He definitely deserves (considerably?) more time to develop this team and program. My point is not to suggest he should be gone or anything. I do think losing coach Smith was a bigger hit than most wanted to believe or acknowledge when it happened. But mainly I am just pointing out some concerning traits of his teams that I have noticed, but I also know many will disagree with some or all of these points, and I am open to this as well. For me, these are things I am hoping to see him grow and improve on during his coaching tenure here.

No. You obviously totally missed the point. (Sigh. Do I even attempt an explanation?) Tony said it really irks him (my paraphrase) that these terrific Omaha players are on someone else's bench. See the OP. My response was (paraphrasing): were you on these guys back at the time, saying we should offer them? Especially Thomas? The only one I remember saying he was that good was me, sticking my neck out. No one saw this kid coming in and doing what he's done. No one. And if you say you did, I say bullshit, show me the post. And if you weren't saying it then, don't tell me you're irked about it now. **** Now, you come in and say "It's Miles' job to scout these high school kids and bring in good players and he should have known that Khyri Thomas was going to be such a stud." (Paraphrasing.) And my responses to YOU are: 1. Not a single D1 coach in the entire country, no matter how much they're being paid, saw this happening. Aside from the Creighton offer -- which came relatively late, after Thomas's senior year of HS -- he only had offers from UMKC, UNO and Portland State. 2. We had Watson, Jacobson and Morrow in the fold. We had room for 1 more guy at that point without oversigning and we needed a big man (still do.) At the END of the season, Petteway, Pitchford and Smith left, opening three additional spots but, by that time, Thomas was already a Creighton commit. When was Miles supposed to get involved with him? 3. Recruiting is not an exact science, no matter how much a coach is paid. Name the D1 coaches who saw Scottie Pippen getting into the NBA Hall of Fame. Name them. Nolan Richardson was paid a lot of money. How come he didn't recruit a kid from within the state of Arkansas? 4. If Miles had offered a scholarship to Johnny Trueblood and we'd passed on Khyri Thomas, I'd have a big problem with it. Then, I could see people saying Miles can't ID talent. But which of the freshmen that we brought in instead of going after Thomas do you think don't belong on a D1 roster? 5. Did you know Thomas was having academic issues at Benson, which resulted in him going to prep school and reclassifying as a 2015 recruit? Did you know that? Should Miles routinely spend scholarships on guys who are potential academic casualties? Like I said, I don't follow HS basketball. But there are lots of people who do (like Chuck Taylor) who could see Thomas' potential. Heck, even you did, so kudos to you. But that begs the questions, why didn't Miles. Yes, there are 350 other coaches who didn't offer, but how many of them are located within 50 miles of Omaha? Hmmmm. And yes, Thomas had some academic questions, but that didn't seem to impede McD from scouting him, seeing his value, and offering him. And yes, Miles still had one open scholarship in the early signing period, and WE ALL know that at least 1 or 2 players leave every year, right? And it wasn't too hard to know that Petteway was going to leave. And even if no one left, you can always make room, that is the way it works. But instead, Miles didn't offer, Thomas got scooped up by McD, and then 3 players did leave, and we scoured the nation to find Bakari out of Arizona (via Michigan or something like that) and we still had (and still have) an open scholarship being unused. Oh, and then Patton got snagged up as well, did Miles even offer? Why was McD able to see his potential way before MIles was? Look, we can explain away why it happened all day and again tomorrow, but in the end it is Miles job to get these things right. Does that hold him to a high standard. Absolutely. But that is what is required when you earn $2M/year in your job. High salary and B1G HC job = high expectations. Maybe Miles will sign 2 more 5* guys this spring and all of this will be moot. I hope so. But right now I am left shaking my head. With all that said, I am happy to see him get in early on some of the younger Omaha prospects. Like I said, I don't follow HS hoops, but that boy Chang sure looks the part. Have we offered him? I don't think so. Do any of you HS hoops experts have more info on him? Is he legit? Hate to let another one get away while we are pondering whether or not to offer.

Not sure where you're coming from here, Tony, to be honest. Your post makes it sound like you think the one guy we actually tried to get wasn't worth the effort, but it sure would have been nice to have a 6'9", 240# center on the floor for us last night. The one at UNO that leads the nation in steals/game: You think he should be a Husker? You fault Miles for not offering? Now, Patton and Thomas. Let's take Patton. Who offered besides Creighton? He blew up the summer AFTER they offered and wound up something like a 5-star per Scout.com. But 5-star players don't need a developmental year as a redshirt. Players who need to take redshirt years weren't worthy of being considered 5-star players. Period. Thomas. You think Miles missed on him? Miles and 350 other D1 coaches? I agree. Here's what I said about Thomas, in the "In state kids" thread on the recruiting page on February 12, 2015: It's very easy to look at last night's box score and say we shoulda. Or to look at Creighton's season stats and see what this kid ended up doing. But what did you have to say about him BEFORE he stepped foot on a college campus? The point isn't that anonymous message board posters didn't spot Thomas, it's that the coaching staff didn't. I don't come on this board bitching about the coaches all the time, but this is a legitimate question. And while maybe Thomas saying he wasn't recruited is a stretch, Miles saying they were on him might be as well. The fact is there's no evidence he was offered. Last night wasn't a one-shot thing, he's averaging 11 points and shooting 63.8%. And he shut down our best player. But I'll look up his stats at the end of the season and let you know how it turns out. You don't have to come back at the end of the season to prove to me how good Thomas is. I'm the one who said, nearly a year ago before any of these kids played a college game, that I thought he was Creighton's best recruit -- including that "5-star" Patton kid. So you don't have to prove me right on him. But where was the groundswell of people back then saying, man, we need to offer him? Sometimes I think I am living in the Twilight Zone. What does it matter if random Nebraska fans on a message board clamored for a local recruit? I don't know about you all, but I haven't watched a single high school game in 20+ year. Maybe you spend your whole life watching every single high school game and scouting the next great player, but man, I don't get it. Last time I checked Miles is the HC of a Div. 1 BIG team in the state of Nebraska and he gets paid $2M to evaluate, recruit and sign qualify players who can elevate our program. Why are we even having this discussion? Are you seriously suggesting that its not a miss by Miles because anonymous fans on a message board didn't call for it before it happened? smh

The scouting was so huge in this game. CU had us pegged to a T and we looked like we had not watched a single minute of film on those guys. One of three things is happening: 1. Miles and his staff are poor at scouting, or 2. Miles and his staff are poor at teaching the scouting report to the players, or 3. The players Miles recruited have such low BB IQs that they can't comprehend the scouting report. Not sure which it is but none of them are a good.

Yes. If Ed is going to play, then there has to be a heavy dose of pick n roll. Problem is that you can't pick n roll with BP because the opponent will not guard BP b/c they know he can't finish or they can block his shot. BP gives his all and we all love him for that but he absolutely stifles this offense in almost every way, especially against a team that scouts us like CU and every team in B1G.

He was looking ahead to his long NBA career. Maybe Miles will be his coach when he is snatched up front the college ranks.

Man I desperately want Morrow to be great but I am struggling. I just don't see how you can play him at the 4. He can't shoot, can't dribble, can't pass and often struggles even catching the ball. What is he going to bring at the 4 other than rebounding? Plus, whoever is guarding him will just sit in the paint which means the opposing team's 4 and 5 will both be allowed to camp in the lane the entire game with complete impunity. He is going to have to develop a jumper or I just don't see where he fits in, especially in today's game where stretch 4s are so valuable. He is a throwback that just doesn't quite fit right now. And yes, I know, he is young and I am not giving up on him. Just being honest but I know I will be accused of drastically over-reacting.

This actually pisses me off way more than the game, especially considering Miles had the self-imposed scholarship sanction again this year. Miles said McD got on him before Miles had a chance to look at "just like Patton". WTH is he talking about!?!

The disparity in scouting for that game was shocking

Because Miami doesn't scout us like McD does. McD knows the Husker players better than Miles does. Owns Miles in scouting

Doesn't surprise me...he is a tough SOB. He may be tough, but up to this point he has been very lost out on the court. Runs around like a chicken with his head cut off at times. Hope he's figured out in the last few days.

The problem is miles has to sub at some point and Morrow is a foul machine right now. Need at least 8 players to make a rotation. With that said definitely would like to see some of the younger guys get more minutes so may as well start them so they can get a rest and then come back in to maximize their time on the floor.