NUdiehard

Tai can get to the rim, he has always been able to get to the rim. Finishing at the rim has always been his problem. I have always been a big, big Tai supporter and I still am a big fan of his. He has worked his butt off and stayed the course when many other players left for greener pastures (or so they thought). He is in incredible physical condition and has very good athletic ability for his size. With all that said, as much as I want to see Tai breakthrough this year, I won't believe it until I see it. I just have never seen a guy find so many ways to miss shots, especially right at the rim. I watched all 4 games in Spain and other than game 1, I continued to see this pattern with Tai on drive after drive. I would bet my bottom dollar that he closes his eyes almost every time he drives to the basket and encounters any form of opposition or contact. There are some people who simply are averse to contact, causing them to flinch, to retract, to even close their eyes in anticipation. It is genetic IMO, I don't know if it can be overcome. If Tai could teach himself to thrive on contact rather than fear it, he could possibly take a major step forward. I just haven't seen any indication of that yet. As for Benny, we heard the same reports about his shooting last year. And he actually did come out and started the year decently shooting the ball. At one point I believe he was our leading 3 point shooter. But then conference started. Everything changes in conference. Opponents are bigger, stronger and faster, but even more important, the scouting is 1000X better. Conference teams know opponents weaknesses better than the players themselves. Once conference hit, BP reverted right back to what where he always has been. Hard to imagine things will change significantly this year, but who knows. He has worked hard on his game and his shot, I guess we will have to wait and see. But even if he improves his shot, he will never be the passer and facilitator that Watson already is. We really need Watson to get his defense up to snuff so he can get extended minutes this year.

Pretty sure he referred to McVeigh as being 6'9" (can anyone confirm?). Just checked the roster and he has increased his stature to 6'8" (from his previous 6'7") on the official roster. I am assuming the roster on Huskers.com is now listing their official heights and weights for the season, especially since the returning players weights have all changed since last year. If so, a little disappointed that Morrow is officially listed at 6'7", clearly showing he is shorter than McVeigh and Jacobson and probably more in the range of 6'5" to 6'6" in reality. He is going to have his work cut out for him in the post in the B1G. To give a comparison, Morrow is listed at 6'7" 225lbs, the exact same height and weight as Shavon. Of course, Morrow is a better athlete, but the sheer mass of some of the centers in the league (ala Purdue) is going to be a real challenge if he ends up playing a lot at the 5. Jacobson is listed at 6'8", but only 222 lbs, so he will also have his work cut out. Interestingly, Tai and Fuller shed 3 lbs, and White lost 4 lbs

Listened to the entire show and about the only thing I got from it was that we are going to be seeing a lot of Benny and Tai this year #themorethingschangethemoretheystaythesame

Last year's roster lists Shavon at 221 lbs. This years at 225 lbs Things that make you go hmmmm.

In the article, there is a link to another SI article about the offensive decline in college basketball: http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2015/02/26/hoop-thoughts-college-basketball-scoring-pace

Interesting article in SI regarding new college basketball officiating coordinator and "Points of Emphasis" for this season: http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2015/10/05/jd-collins-mens-basketball-officiating-rules-changes

I know many will disagree, but if Watson is not starting or ready to play the bulk of the minutes at PG, then I would rather see Tai at PG than BP. I know that Miles has made the switch on Tai from PG to SG, but I just don't see what value BP brings over Tai at the PG, but I see a lot of value Tai could bring over BP. Tai has drastically improved on the defensive end and towards the end of last year was one of our best defenders. At 6'4", I actually think he is a better overall defender than BP. I felt teams last year began to expose BP and learned how to take advantage of his height. Tai is at least a as good of a shooter (and hopefully better by now) and Tai certainly is better at driving the lane. Neither is a particularly good ball-handler or passer, so that is a wash IMO. Just not sure what BP brings that Tai can't, yet Tai is taller and has other abilities that BP simply does not and will not ever have. With that said, maybe the problem is that if you put Tai at the 1, then there simply is nobody that Miles has confidence in to play the 2. I would hope that White, or even Shields could handle that, but maybe not. If so, that certainly limits the options and that would definitely require Tai to get a LOT of minutes because he is the only legit 2 on the team.

Miles said on the record very recently that McVeigh is a 4. At least for this year. He may play a few minutes at the 3, but he if he is going to play this year, Miles made it sound like it will be 90%+ at the 4 (maybe some 5?) http://journalstar.com/sports/huskers/life-in-the-red/mcveigh-s-length-to-help-nu-s-frontcourt/article_ccd1686e-4211-11e5-a049-d702d144cc4d.html

I'd say even more recently than that. The recruits we're bringing in now are head and shoulders above guys like Vucetic, Hawkins and Fuller, and even Webster. The staff has stepped it up big-time starting with the last class, and Roby is a continuation of that same caliber of player. Obviously, we know we've been unsuccessful in landing quality big men thus far, but the overall quality of the players entering the program now is pretty remarkable. I still see 2015-2016 as a rebuilding/developmental year with very little chance at an NCAA bid at season's end, but I look at the 2016-2017 team as a group that could do a lot of damage, especially if we can solidify the front court through recruiting between now and next year. It's an exciting time to be a Husker hoops fan for sure. Yes, there will be some teeth-gnashing and hand wringing this year from those who don't get the patience part of your scenario ("but we're in year 4 and blah blah/whine whine"). I can hear it now. Prepare for it. But we need to stay the course; I agree with your take. One caveat is in how many kids transfer out of the program next spring...spring after that...etc. We do need to stop the bleeding there some. Well, I'm not sure how much bleeding you'd really say we've had. Petteway went pro; Walt was a beotch and quit; Tarin Smith saw the writing on the wall with Glynn Watson and took a step down in competition level. That was last year. Year before that, Deverell Biggs got waxed because he needed to go and Nathan Hawkins took a step down in competition level to "get closer to home." Vooch was, well, not going to make it here. Miles didn't run off Benny. He didn't run off Nick Fuller. He didn't run off Jacob Hammond. Guys have left, but sometimes guys do that. I don't get the sense that Miles has pushed people out the way Collier did, or even Doc for that matter. In the end, I am note sure it really matter whether Miles ran them off or not or whether they turned pro or turned in into a disco diva. The fact is that attrition is at an all-time high at many schools, including Nebraska (for all different kinds of reasons). This is Miles' fourth year, and there is no indication that Miles has been immune from this extreme attrition rate OR that he will become immune in the future. Thus, IMO it is an issue that must be considered in rating the state of the program in any particular year. If 40% of D1 players transfer on average today, odds almost demand that not every one of our 5 freshman will stay here all 5 years. In fact, odds would indicate at least 2 of them will transfer. If one of those 2 is either Watson or Morrow, then that sets things back once again and the cycle starts all over. I am not trying to be debbie downer or indict Miles on this. However, i just feel the alarming transfer rates of young players almost require a new perspective, a new paradigm, on how we evaluate a team and a program. 20 years ago, if a team had 5 solid freshman or sophomores (barring 5 NBA players like the Michigan fab 5), you could certainly find the reason for optimism knowing that even if the team struggled in its first year or 2, they would continue to develop and mature and in years 3 and 4 things would likely come together and produce very good results. I am not sure we can still think like that in today's collegiate athletics environment. Not only are there no guarantees, there actually is a very strong likelihood (based on national statistics) that 40% of the current players will not play in years 3 and 4, and if Miles scores and signs an elite recruit, that player will probably only be here 1 or 2 years and go pro. I hope upon hope that all our situation will be different. That all these guys will stay. But it isn't realistic. And I am not sure we have soooo much talent that we can lose 40% and still become a top 4 team in the B1G next year, or the year after, etc. And of course, this doesn't even factor in injuries to the guys that do stay. In summary, I am thrilled with the increased talent level Miles has brought in this year and I really like Roby for next year. If all these guys stay and don't get injured, I fully agree that they could potentially be that team we have all been waiting for all these years. But if one-third to 40% of them leave, and then another player or two gets injured (even if just for 10 games in a season, etc), it makes things much less certain. I guess all that to say is that unfortunately, I have almost come to the point of evaluating each team on a year by year basis. I want to look down the road and say "wow, in 3 years this team is going to be special". But in the back of my mind I keeping that in 3 years we are going to be talking about what we could have been if so-and-so had just stayed for all 4 years. This is why if I have one major disappointment, it is that Miles has failed to land even a serviceable big for this year. If this team even had a Brandon Ubel type player, it could at least compete. I fear we are going to get dominated inside, which is going to make us play junk defense, force us to overcompensate on the boards, etc, basically adapt our entire style of play to try and mitigate our weakness inside. Call me what you want, I would love to have Vucetic on our roster right now. First, there is no way he could make us worse because we have an open scholarship so even if he never played a minute nothing is lost. But think his height alone could have been enough to put under the hoop and disrupt the opponent for 10-20 minutes a game. At least give us some presence (and I'm sorry, but I have not seen anything from Hammond (who is closer to 6'8 than 6'10) to make me think he is that guy. Ok, with all that said, if Miles can land a decent big for next year, then things could really, really turn up for this program. The transfer situation can, and should, work both ways. Players transfer out, but there are also exponentially more players available to transfer in. Miles needs to capitalize on this and get that big we so desperately need.

Northwesterns 2016 recruiting class is ranked #7 in the country now

x 1000 All these rules are good, but they are just band aids. Reducing the relentless and excessive physicality of the game is the only thing that will clean up the game, increase scoring, increase freedom of movement and allow fans to truly appreciate the skill and beauty of elite basketball as it was meant to be

Do you want to watch a game where 100 fouls are committed but only 20 are called? Do you want to watch a game where the team that fouls more will have a better chance of winning because the refs are only supposed to blow the whistle 20 times to appease fans who think foul calls disrupt the flow of the game? Because that is the current state of college basketball.

Pretty sure we only had 12 scholarship players last year unless you are counting Menke. We didn't use them all last year I thought for sure we gave it to Menke again but apparently not. Menke was on a schollie the past couple of seasons, and he helped boost the team APR in the process. Kye Kurkowski didn't have a schollie, though. Thats what I thought. Menke would've made it 13 last year then in that case. The scholarship was open for the fall semester of the 2014/15 season. Miles held on the open scholarship until the very end of the semester in hopes of landing a spring semester transfer. When that didn't pan out, Menke was given the scholarship for the spring semester because it was clear it would go unused otherwise. With that said, this all seems moot. We all know that the scholarship was not originally "saved" for him, it just happened to be "open" once again and therefore was given to a walk-on rather than simply being wasted.

Pretty sure we only had 12 scholarship players last year unless you are counting Menke.

Measured at 6'4.75" without shoes, which is respectable for a wing. For comparison, Justise Winslow measured at 6'4.5" without shoes (which surprised me, thought he was taller than that).

The more interesting question is can Burno contact him directly. Burno is not currently an assistance coach with any team, so is this a loophole that might allow him to contact signed recruits directly without being in any violation of rules?

And he might not be that much smaller when all is said and done. Based on the video we have seen and the pictures of Ed, I do not believe he is 6'7 1/2 in bare feet as he said he is in an interview. If he was legitimately that tall, he would easily be listed as 6'9" on the NU roster, and I just don't think he is close to that. He looks much closer to 6'6" in bare feet and 6'7" in shoes. Of course I am just going off pictures and videos and estimating from there. Edit Update: Draft Express states that Tristan Thompson measured at 6'7 1/2 inches w/o shoes and 6'8.75 inches in shoes. He is listed as 6'9" on the Cavs roster. If Morrow was truly 6'7 1/2 inches w/o shoes as he claims, then he is exactly the same height as Tristan. When I see Morrow on video, he just does not look as tall at Tristan to me.

I envision Morrow as a smaller version of Tristan Thompson.

I notice you didn't boldface these sentences in my post: So only sunshine pumping allowed huh?

This guy would change my entire perspective on next season

Dimes, you are correct to give some context. But I also think the "gross" number of transfers each year can skew the perception some. According to a website I just checked, as of 5 days ago, there are 9 teams in the B1G that did not have a single transfer. The only teams in the B1G that did have transfers were Ill, IU, NU, Purdue and Rutgers. I haven't researched it enough, but I would be curious to know how many players have transferred from Wisconsin over the past 3-5 years. I know Uthoff was a big deal a few years ago, and there may have been others. Maybe somebody knows more about this. As you mention, Wisconsin is often used as the model of what we want to become. I think even Miles has said this. When I checked Wisconsin's coaching staff, his top two assistants have been with him forever. As for players, I just don't recall seeing a lot of transfers from their program, but obviously I don't follow it as close. I do know Bo has a history of redshirting and developing players over 4-5 years and that has produced miraculous results. It probably is petty of me, but it is a bit of a pet peeve of mine when I see so many posters constantly say "you all are over-reacting, this happens all the time." My favorite was during the season, when some of us would point out concerns about the team and its performance after a loss, many posters would chastise such comments and say "it is just one game, you are all over-reacting. This isn't football. One game doesn't make or break a season." Ironically, they would keep saying this after loss after loss after loss. I kept think "it isn't just one game we are concerned about, it is our performance over the entire season, including the multiple losses that continue to add up (and even the poor performances in the close wins over bad teams)." In the end, those concerns noticed early in the season proved to be true for the whole season. That is somewhat similar to my concerns here. In isolation, it is easy to rationalize away each and every transfer, declaration for pro, assistant coach leaving, etc. But when taken as a whole, I just think it is hard to deny that the all of them together will affect next season and possibly the long-term. I want this program to succeed and have long-term success and stability and I think this board is simply a place to express concern or frustration when things happen that may thwart, stunt or slow-down that process. And in some ways, I am simply saying that maybe there are some red flags that I am going to keep an eye on going forward. I am not in any way, shape or form suggesting that it is doom and gloom and there is no hope. But when I see areas of concern in the post season, just like many of us pointed them out during the season, I think it is fair to point them out. And when I see good signs, such as a much improved recruiting class this year, I will point that out as well [if Miles finds a way to sign a quality transfer big for next year (2015), I will sing his praises from the rooftops!] I just don't understand why some people think you have to pump sunshine 24/7 to be a true fan. I just call it like I see it. Everyone is free to disagree or make counter-points. In fact, I feel I learn the most when I take a stance and then many people provide counter-positions. There is nothing personal about it IMO.

Hal, do you expect that at some point NU should be a consistent participant in the NCAA tourney? If you answer yes to the question, then: (1) Do you expect the coach to consistently recruit high 3* players and a few 4* players and then keep and develop the large majority of those players for 4-5 years? OR (2) Do you expect the coach to consistently recruit 4* and 5* players annually? OR (3) If you think there is another method in which the coach can achieve the expected goal of consistently participating in the dance that does not require either 1 or 2 to be met, then I would be interested to hear that method. If you answered NO to the first question (about whether you expect the team to eventually be a consistent participant in the NCAA tourney), then this would explain why we see things differently in regards to 1 or 2. Yes to your first question. I'd expect Miles and staff to recruit and develop 3 & 4 star recruits regularly, with a healthy balance of each. Anything better than that would be beyond my expectations. Then as the inevitable departures occur, I expect Miles to bring in new recruits equal to or better than the players they are replacing. As to retaining them all for 4-5 years on a continual rotation of players, I just don't have that expectation, and it's simply because this is the day and age we live in. I mean it would be nice to keep and develop all of our recruits every year, but it's the players who don't have the patience for this process more than it is anything the coaches do (or don't do). Players want playing time and want to play right away. Coaches don't always have the luxury develop them year by year so that by they time they are juniors and seniors they are starters. Instead they need to try to get players who are able to come in and contribute right away. In a way, freshman, jucos and transfers have replaced the 4 year traditional player development system. So to me it's not that much of a problem, and every team out there pretty much has to deal with the same thing. Hal, I appreciate the well-reasoned response. Overall, I can certainly understand your thinking on this. I do have one follow up question. When you say "as the inevitable departures occur, I expect Miles to bring in new recruits equal to or better than the players they are replacing", do you mean the new players are better as freshmen than the players they replaced were "as freshmen" or as they would be had they returned (i.e., soph, jr. senior). For instance, if we are comparing Bakari to Tarin, do you expect Bakari next year to be better than Tarin was last year (as a freshman) or better than Tarin would be next year (as an experienced sophomore)? To me, the question is whether your expectation level as to recruits and retaining players will lead to the expected result (NCAA births). I hope you are correct that your expectations will be sufficient. But it is difficult for me to see how recruiting mostly 3* and some 4* will lead to us finishing in the top half or third of the conference on a regular basis if we have the same turnover as the average team. In regards to recruiting, here is sample of what NU is up against in this league: We now need to add Chris Lavert returning to Michigan for his senior year. And there are many other such examples. For instance, Ohio State's 2015 class has one 5* and three 4*. Mich St. has one 5* two 4* and one 3* in addition to all their guys returning (including Valentine). These are the teams we will need to compete with on the court on a year after year basis. But maybe it is possible as you say. I certainly am encouraged by the 2015 recruits. This definitely is a major step forward. It is unfortunate that we still lack a big. This is without a doubt my greatest concern and source of frustration. But maybe that is just part of the building process that we are going through. But if I am completely honest, if we don't get a transfer big in this class, I think we are looking at a bottom 6 standing in the B1G next year (early projections have us in the bottom 2 or 3). Hopefully we will not have too many defections next year because losing any significant contributor (let along 2 or 3) would be another significant step back that would be difficult to overcome.

Hal, do you expect that at some point NU should be a consistent participant in the NCAA tourney? If you answer yes to the question, then: (1) Do you expect the coach to consistently recruit high 3* players and a few 4* players and then keep and develop the large majority of those players for 4-5 years? OR (2) Do you expect the coach to consistently recruit 4* and 5* players annually? OR (3) If you think there is another method in which the coach can achieve the expected goal of consistently participating in the dance that does not require either 1 or 2 to be met, then I would be interested to hear that method. If you answered NO to the first question (about whether you expect the team to eventually be a consistent participant in the NCAA tourney), then this would explain why we see things differently in regards to 1 or 2.

I really don't like this argument at all, and I here it all the time. Trust me I believe it helps, Eric Piatkowski wasn't exactly blowing up my mind with athletic ability Nick Fuller and Bronson Koenig played on the same team and Fuller led the team in points. The problem lies into if the players buy into the system, because Miles "System" has always worked. Also just to prove to you how wrong that statement is this link should back it up! http://dailythunder.com/2010/11/remember-that-one-time-kd-couldnt-bench-185-yeah-he-can-now/ Are you seriously saying that Fuller didn't see the floor because he didn't buy into Miles system? And if Fuller is better than Koenig, then how come Bo Ryan offered a scholarship to Koenig and not to Fuller even though they both were Wisconsin players that Bo would have scouted and seen and reviewed extensively?

I have seen a recurring theme on this board that I have difficulty digesting or understanding. It revolves around what fans should expect from MIles, his team and his program. I am not talking so much about wins and losses per se, but more about things like player turnover, coaching turnover, recruiting, coaching, etc. For instance, when Pitchford and Tarin announce they are leaving the program (your could throw in previous players like Serge, Hawkins, etc), many people respond by saying "Well, there are 600+ players who transfer every year so this much be expected". Uh, Okay? Does this somehow make it fine or better for our program? I am not sure what the point of this comment is. If my son gets in trouble at school for having poor behavior, is it excused if he says that "all the other kids were doing it too"? This may be a bit dramatic, and I get that coach Miles can't control everything, but in the end it is his program and he is responsible for everything that happens in his program. There are approximately 340 div. 1 programs, and each year about 250 of them are terrible and another 60 are not good enough to get an at-large bid to the dance. So do we want or expect our program to be just like them? If Nebraska simply continues to do what is "expected" or "usual" or "commonplace" in college basketball, then NU will continue to be terrible and have no chance to be a regular top tier member of the B1G and a regular participant to the dance. In order for NU to get where we all want it to be, NU must go against the norm and against the current. We have no tradition to fall back on. We cannot expect to just show up and win year after year. Our coach is going to have to be special. Above the grade. Better than most. He is going to have to be able to do something that so many coaches at NU have failed to do during their tenure here. Doing the norm, or what other schools are doing, will not get it done. Most fans simply acknowledge that assistant coaches leave and that is to be expected and maybe actually a good thing (shows we are moving up heh?) Well, you might want to investigate Bo Ryan's staff at Wisconsin and see how much turnover he has had over the years. How about Osborne (I know, I know, different time different era, etc). And as for players leaving. So we don't need Tarin, or Pitchford, or Hawkins, or Serge. I would take Serge right now in a heartbeat. Mock me all you want. But argued he should have redshirted his first year here and now he would be a RS sophomore next year. He is a legit 7 feet tall. He has much better hands than stone hands Moses. Is he stiff? Yes. Is he a total stiff? I have no idea because he never had the chance to stay and develop here. And why not? Last year NU had an open scholarship--completely unused. thus, it would have cost Miles and NU nothing (in terms of other recruits) to keep him. This year, 2 unexpected players left (which apparently happens every year so Miles could "expect it"), and now we are trying to fill 2 scholarships in May with no big man on the roster. If Serge ends up playing any productive minutes at Bradley (or wherever he is at), then I am going to be frustrated that he isn't still here. If Miles wants to succeed here at NU, he needs to find a way to break down the wall of expectations. If he simply accomplishes what is "expected" of him, then he will join the long list of failures. So for players, he either needs to recruit like a monster every year just like so many other elite coaches in the conference do (ie, OSU, Mich, MSU, UW, Maryland, IU, Ill, not to mention teams like Purdue, Iowa, etc) OR he needs to recruit solid players and "develop" them over 4 or 5 years. Those are the only two options. Hate to break it, but Miles is not going to "out-coach" the bulk of the coaches in this league. Too many great coaches. Hopefully he can match the best, but he will not outcoach them. So its either recruit entire roster of 4* and a few 5*, or coach up and develop some high 3* to join the occasional 4*. Tarin Smith is not an elite player. And maybe Bakari will turn out to be as good or better. But maybe not. And frankly, I find it highly unlikely that Bakari will be better as a freshman than Tarin would be as a sophomore. At some point, the turnover and starting over has to end and the buildup has to begin. In fact, if you take the position that it must be expected for 2-3 players to leave every year, then as fans we really can't get too excited about a good recruiting class like this year. Let's say Watson and Morrow struggle early but show flashes and then actually start to produce some quality minutes by then end of next year. What good is that if they both leave after next year. Are we supposed to just chalk this up to "well, it happens everywhere, it is to be expected"? That is the logical conclusion of that position isn't it?