NUdiehard

Other than Watson, it seems like all of Miles' current recruits are rather uniform (not sure if this is good or not) Watson 5'11" White 6'7" Marrow 6'7" McVeigh 6'7" Jacobson 6'8" Agua??? 6'8" 2016 Roby 6'8" Pinder 6'8"

If they have the "green light", then there must be failure of communication or understanding between coach and player. Anyone who has been attending or watching the games must understand that Benny, Tai and Tarin pass up open look after open look only to pass to SS or TP late in the clock leaving a very difficult contested shot. Last game vs. Indiana BP was WIDE OPEN to the point of ridiculousness (because Indiana blatently didn't even guard him) and yet he didn't even look at the basket. That does not appear to me to be a player who thinks he has the green light (or does not understand what green light means). If he has the green light, then he must be told that he "must" shoot it if he is open. He must be instructed that he must shoot it and that he is hurting the team by not shooting it when open.

Yep, we're just rolling in talent. That's why Crean chose not to guard 2 or 3 talented players every time we had the ball. I don't see how not having guys who can shoot should remotely affect our offensive production. Any decent coach should be able to get around that problem.... HB, I agree with you in many respects. There is no doubt NU still has some major deficiencies. However, I am not completely convinced those "deficient" players are quite as "deficient" as they have been performing (at least on the offensive end). I started another thread on this issue, but is Benny such a terrible shooter that other coaches shouldn't have to guard him at all? I mean this in all sincerity. BP is shooting 42% on 3s for the year, yet I watched him completely pass up open shot after open shot in that Indiana game. Is that 100% a lack of "talent" on BP's end, or is there some issue with him feeling that his "role" on the team is to not shoot and to only play defense. If BP feels that defense is his only role, then where did that feeling come from? I would imagine that how he is coached day after day after day plays in to that in some respect. I am a huge Miles guy and support him 100%, and I am very confident he is bring in better talent (which we definitely need) and that he will get it done in the end. But that doesn't mean there aren't times I am left scratching my head. I think it is OK to raise questions at times, it doesn't mean we aren't supporting the team or the coach. This may be just me, but at this point, based on all I have seen, I would rather have BP shooting a wide-open uncontested shot than TP or SS shooting an off-balance contested 25 footer. The role players must feel like they are an integral part of the offensive game plan as well as the defensive end. That doesn't mean they have to shoot 15-20 times, but when they are open they need to let it fly IMO.

Many people are claiming that the loss of Ray Gallegos is looming large because, even though he only made 33% of his 3 pointers, he was at least a "threat" to shoot the 3 ball that had to be guarded. This has me thinking, can NU re-create that "threat" this year without Ray Gallegos? Looking back, the "threat" of Gallegos shooting a 3 should not have carried much weight b/c he was a below average 3 point shooter in the end. Nonetheless, he shot 161 three point shots last year (making 54 of them for a 33.5% average). Apparently, his relentless attempts forced opposing coaches to feel compelled to guard him. So, why can't NU recreate that threat this year? If I were coach Miles, I would be very tempted to tell Tai, Benny and Tarin that "if you are open and have a good look at the 3, let it fly. And if you miss, don't worry about it. Every time you get a good look, just let it fly and we will support you no matter what happens." The three of them combined (Tai, Benny and Tarin) have currently shot 58 three pointers combined (making 15 for a 27.5% average). This average is not good at all, and is heavily weighed down by Tai's abysmal average of 16.7% (5 for 30). Smith is at 33.3% (3 for 9) and Benn is at 42.1% (8 for 19). The question is, between the three of them, if they were given the green light, could they average 33.5% or better for the remainder of the season on 3s? If so, wouldn't giving them the green light in essence "re-create" the "threat" that Gallegos gave us last year? If they just keep launching, and hopefully have at least 1 or 2 games in which they get hot and make a string of them, then would opposing coaches feel "compelled" to guard them at that point? They did for Gallegos even though he was only shooting 33.5%, so why not these 3 players? Now, Tai has got to pick it up for this to work. With that said, I think Tai's biggest problem (as we all know by now) is between the ears. He simply doesn't have confidence, so he is hesitant to shoot and when he does shoot he is more "hoping" that it goes in than believing it will go in. I have heard many reports that in practice he shoots the 3 ball at a high percentage. We know for a fact that he was 3 for 3 in the K St. Scrimmage. We also know for a fact that as a 17 year old on the New Zealand national team he made a lot of 3 point shots as one of the youngest players ever to play on the national scene. I believe he has the ability to make at least 30% of his shots, but he needs confidence. If Coach Miles were to give him the green light and say "shoot it, and just keep shooting", this may be just what he needs. All it takes it one game where he makes 3 or 4 of them, and then other teams will have to "respect" him and start guarding him. The same is true for Benny and Tarin. If they shoot enough, they will eventually get hot and make a string of them. That will increase their confidence and it will force other teams to guard them. Heck, Benny is already shooting 42% this year, but teams still don't guard him b/c he is still afraid to shoot it. To me that is crazy! Why do we make Petteway shoot a contested 25 foot fade away 3 pointer after Benny passes up 2 wide open 3 pointers? I wouldn't guard him either if he isn't even going to look at the basket. The fact is that our "scorers" aren't that much better anyway under the current system (of being forced to take so many difficult shots). Petteway is shooting 33.7% on 3s and 41.8% overall. Shavon is shooting 26.5% on 3s and a respectable 47.7% overall. Walt P is shooting 33% on 3s and a poor 27.8% overall. The reality is NU is shooting a very poor percentage overall even when we consistently funnel almost every shot through the big 3. So why not change it up? Why not roll the dice and allow the "role" players to play a more prominent role on the offensive end and live with the results. The reality is that what we are doing isn't working, so why not change it up and see what happens. Now, I am NOT saying that Tai, Benny and Tarin should shoot as much or more than the Big 3. I am not saying that at all. That would be ridiculous. What I am saying is that when they have an open look, then they should not only have the green light, but should be told to shoot it and not worry about whether it goes in or not. That way, they don't have to feel like they missed their one and only shot if it rims out. If they shoot it more frequently with the backing of the coach and team, someone is going to get hot and that will force other teams to guard them and that will open things up more and more for the Big 3.

Not sure what posts you are reading to compare my position to Dean's. This was Dean's post on the subject: This was my post: I wasn't even going to reference the "hard dribble drive" but I included it as an option b/c I respect Dean's knowledge and he had already referenced this as his strategy of choice. My emphasis was clearly on using the dribble or (more likely) the pass to push the ball up the floor and attack the press. As HB just said, getting the ball past half court just so you can set up your offense should not be the main goal when being pressed. The goal should be to attack and try to get a scoring opportunity at the basket, whether by pass or dribble or both. That was my point.

But Smith played 15-20 minutes at a position we don't have anyone to play. And Ray was a role player only for the casual fan who doesn't watch defense. And running the offense. He may be the first 30 minute a game role player, I guess. HB, I can understand your position on this to a point. However, if losing two role players makes NU so much worse, then almost every other team in the country should be MUCH worse this year than last year (and every year). Most teams (and I would venture virtually every team we have played this year) lost MUCH more than NU lost. That is why many media members and prognosticators picked NU to do well. It is always a function of how you did last year and what you return versus what other teams return. If anything, I felt Nebraska should do quite well in the non-conference because it would be returning 5 starters and 6 of its top 8 players from a team that went to the NCAA tourney last year. And although we lost Leslee, we also added Moses who played in all of the games except the last 3 (so his injury cannot be the excuse for NU's struggles this entire season). In contrast, most teams are breaking in 2,3 or 4 new starters this year. NU's experience from last year should carry over. NU should not have to start over every year when it is returning 5 starters. That is why I cringe whenever people on this board bring up "last year we started this way and we know what happened." This is not last year. It is understandable why NU struggled early last year--It was breaking in 4 new starters. Now, the shoe should be on the other foot. NU is returning 5 starters and other teams are breaking in new starters. If anything, it was in conference play that I felt we might begin to struggle, because that is when other teams "new" players begin to hit their stride and teams with more "talent" begin to take over.

My biggest problem with the game last night was that NU did not attack the press. Miles said they spent the 9 days off working on the offense and press break. What???? The offense was horrid and the press break was a disaster. When a team presses, you must make them pay. You must attack the press. Let me repeat. When a team presses, you MUST make them pay. When a team presses, you MUST ATTACK!! I HATE. let me repeat HATE when we are content to throw it sideways repeatedly against the press and then just walk into double teams at half court. ATTACK the press with a hard dribble drive or maybe, just maybe, pass the ball DOWN THE FLOOR!!! Think about it. If Hawaii is putting 3 defenders to guard 2 ball handlers in the back court, what does that mean? It means that NU has 3 offensive players on its side of the court being guarded by 2 Hawaii defenders. So why don't we pass it to one of our 3 players on our side of the court? Why do we keep passing it sideways? Never attacking. Never trying to make them pay! If you allow a team to press with impunity, then they will press you all game and get the better end of the stick b/c eventually the press will cause some turnovers resulting in points the other way. That is why you must make a team pay for pressing. Let me state it another way by asking a question. Why doesn't NU press other teams? The reason is b/c usually the advantage gained is not worth the risk. Yes, you might get create some turnovers, but you will also (unless we are playing ourselves) give up easy baskets. The press is always susceptible to giving up easy baskets. That is why most teams don't press. It is high risk/reward. BUT, if a team like Nebraska does not attack the press, then it is all reward with no risk.

Not to be argumentative, but I disagree with that assessment. I think you can run motion with anyone you have because it's so flexible. 5 out, 4 out & 1 in, 3 out & 2 in, you can focus on cutting or screening or ball screens or handoffs or dribble drives. You can go from very basic to very complicated based on your personal. And we run lots of set pieces or quick hitters if you will, double low picks for the pop followed by the curl cut, the back pick someone was talking about as a secondary. There are lots of ways to be successful at basketball. I like motion. They way it looks and feels, they way it makes the defense guard all 5 players all the time, the freedom it gives the players to be creative which makes it harder to guard. You can win running the Flex (Sorry flex guys but I see it as the antithesis to the motion). You don't have to run a motion to be successful. I just wish they would. I do agree with you when you said "we seemed to have more movement and better natural flow, cutting, passing, etc last season." We don't have that now and I am wishing we could get it back. Regarding the motion offense, Miles commented on his radio show just a couple weeks ago that he thought/expected this team would be much further along in that regard than we actually are. He said he has tried to implement the motion offense every year since he has been here but the players struggle grasping the concept and in the end has had to go to more sets instead. Miles taught the motion in the preseason and tried to have the team run motion in a couple of the early non-conf games this year and it was bad, the players did not execute it well at all. In the end, he basically said that "players today" really struggle to run motion concepts and so he has to install and run more sets even though his preference would be to run more motion.

I had some time to think about the game this morning....what is our record in games where we shoot under 10 fts? We don't have an inside offensive presence...we don't currently have a defacto outside presense....if we aren't getting to the FT line then not many of our points are going to be easy. Creighton is a team that doesn't put people on the line. We typically require FTs to win against anyone except truly inferior opponents. Until that changes, they are going to cause us problems no matter how good of a team we have and how poor of a team they have. One thing to keep in mind. Last year there was the big emphasis on "freedom of movement" which led to historic highs in the number of defensive fouls called. This may have been a contributor to our success last year since we just kept driving it in the lane time after time and often got the foul call to put TP or Shavon to the line. Based on the games I have seen so far this year, that whole emphasis seems to be out the window. For instance, last night Shavon did try to drive it on a few occasions and when he collided with 4 CU defenders who were just standing in the paint waiting for him its almost like the refs were saying "he just tried to drive it against 4 guys and I am not going to bail him out even if there was a little contact. Play on."

There has been a lot of talk about Tai's defensive "lapses" and letting his man free, but I think this is more a product of the new defense this year under Molinari than Tai (or any other player) in particular. Molinari runs a "pack the paint" defense. Ironically, it is very similar to what McD runs against NU (although I don't think it is their standard defense, more of a NU specialty). In a pack the paint defense, the defender who is guarding the man with the ball extends out to the ball-handler. Every other defender falls into the paint area in almost a zone type concept. You might think it of it as having one man on the ball, with the other 4 covering "elbow, elbow, block block". Doc actually ran a version of this, but he had a slight twist on it. Anyway, the irony is that a pack the paint defense works best against athletic teams that are not great shooting teams (ie, Nebraska). It does not work so well against good shooting teams because while it does clog the lane it leaves 3 point shooters open, especially on the weak side (the side opposite the ball). For instance, if the Ball is on the right wing, and Tai is guarding a CU player who is on the left wing, Tai is taught to fall off his man and "sag" clear into the paint area (probably around the elbow area, maybe even all the way to the middle of the paint). That is what he is drilled to do day after day after day in practice. And that is what he did in the game. The problem is that Creighton is a good passing team and they would either quickly swing it to Tai's side or they would simply throw a long "skip" pass clear across court. The result is an open 3 with Tai trying to close out the distance but unable to make up the ground b/c he is so far off his man. I am using Tai as an example, but the same principal applies to all the players b/c it is the scheme that Molinari runs. The problem I have is that Miles and Molinari did not adjust this game plan for Creighton. As we all know (and obviously Miles and Molinari know full well), CU is not particularly athletic, but they do have a few 3 point shooters. So why did we stay in the pack the paint concept? Miles even admitted in his post game comments that he thought we could just do "what we always do" and be fine and he admitted after the fact he was wrong. It is clear that CU adjusted its defensive scheme to play a style "just for Nebraska". In fact, McD has done this every year, and he has mastered it. It almost appears that he knows our team better than Miles knows our team. I just don't understand why NU didn't adjust its defensive scheme to the personnel on CU's roster rather than just running our standard stuff. Frustrating. And I won't even get into to our offensive "scheme".

First, I haven't seen anybody "write off this season", but rather show frustration over this loss and show some "concern" for the rest of this season if we don't get it together soon. Second, you do realize that those "people" who have shown concern in past years after bad losses like this were CORRECT in "every year since you can remember" EXCEPT just one (last year). Third, people are not reacting to just this one loss. Many are reacting to the first seven games, none of which NU has played particularly well. NU has only played 3 teams that are worth anything, and has lost to 2 of them (one of them being at home where we are supposed to have a huge home court advantage). And even against the cupcakes NU has not looked very good.

I would also suggest that the students start the chant BEFORE the team introductions begin. There usually is a lull between the end of the anthem and the beginning of team intros, and that is when the chant should begin. It takes a few times for the chant to catch on, and if the students wait until intros have started, the intros are almost done by the time it catches on and takes off, plus they are fighting over the PA announcer as well.

I'm not sure you can compare this year's statistics to last years when this year's includes 4 out of 6 games against cupcakes and 2 decent but not great teams whereas last year's includes the entire B1G schedule.

I had no idea there is post-game show after the Miles interview on 1400. Has that been available all season? Who are the hosts? Interesting.

See my post above. We aren't talking about his afternoon show. We are talking about his Nebraska basketball post-game show. As far as I know, Welch is the first radio host to step up to the plate and start a Nebraska basketball post-game show ever and he definitely is the only one doing it now. Even if you don't like it (and feel free not to listen), having something is better than nothing and for most of us having a post-game show is greatly appreciated because it has simply never been available before now. Unless he goes completely off the rails I think Welch should be supported in his efforts to start, and continue, a Nebraska basketball post-game show.

I did not know 93.7 was doing a NU BB post game show or I would have tuned in to listen. Nothing worse than commercial after commercial after commercial after commercial on the 1400 post game show. And then, when Kent and Matt do speak for their 30 second clip, they almost seem to be at a loss for words or what to speak about, as if nothing comes to mind to talk about the game they both just watched. I have listened to some of Welch's afternoon show and I can understand why there may be differing views of his style or his show. But I don't know how anyone could complain about him doing a post-game show for Nebraska basketball. I have been following NU b-ball for 35 years and I cannot remember every having an alternative post game radio show available--Welch is the first to step up to the plate and take on that task. For that, he should be commended and everyone on this board should be thanking him and tuning in because if he doesn't get some support and listeners, that post-game show will be cancelled and we will be back to having no alternative once again.

As much as I like Leslee, we're better off in the long run if we have his scholarship for next year. Wow. With all due respect, I completely disagree with you, ajb, shortdust and whoever else shares this sentiment. The only way I could maybe understand this thinking is if you are convinced that Leslee is just injury plagued and will never be able to play more than spot minutes and be less than 100% while doing it. But if he could come back healthy by next season and play a full season, I would take him in a heartbeat and count our blessings. If Leslee came back, he would only be here for next year. He is not eating a scholarship for 4 years or anything like that. Just next year, which he would be playing and contributing. Unless something completely unexpected happens in the spring signing period, NU is going to be in the same, or possibly worse, situation in regards to lack of big men next year. Miles did not sign a big man in this class (and no, I do not consider Morrow a big man; especially not in the B1G as a freshman). NU will lose Moses and Leslee and it not bringing in anyone to replace them. I have already seen enough of Hammond to know that he probably is not going to be force down low for a while, if ever. Leslee has proven he can be an decent, if not solid, big man. Why would any fan of NU not want him for a full season next year, when we could make a serious run at the sweet 16? Lets put it another way. If Leslee were healthy this year, he would easily be in the top 6 or 7 IMO (I think he is better than Rivers, he just can't start b/c Miles needs to switch between Pitchford and Leslee). Why would we not want one of our top 7 players back? If anyone thinks all these freshman are going to walk in and just start dominating, you need to reconsider. Think about Tai and how he struggled last year. Look at Tarin Smith this year. Fuller? I know that the new guys are more highly ranked (although not more highly than Tai according to some), but that doesn't mean they are physically ready for the B1G, or that they can master Miles' defensive scheme quickly, etc. Besides, NONE of them are centers. Unless Miles magically and remarkably pulls a rabbit out of his had and lands a top-notch juco big man in the spring, I would much rather have Leslee return and be our backup center all year next year, hands down. If Miles has a 5 star wing that also wants to sign in the spring, then he can sign him and room will make itself available like it always does due to attrition. I think you make a lot of good points. However, I don't think Leslie was ever going to "come back healthy", even before this knee injury. Those knees are chronic, would limit his minutes and productivity, and the "if he were healthy" assumptions were always going to be relative. If this is your assumption going into next year (or any year with Leslee), then I can understand this sentiment. However, even with that said, if we could just get 15-20 minutes per game, every game, with Leslee next year, I would still take him over an open scholarship. We are going to have a huge hole in the middle next year (again, unless Miles can pull a rabbit out of the hat) and we are all going to be talking about how good this team could be if we just had "one more big man".

We do have a lot coming back next year. About the only thing we don't have coming back is a legitimate center. That is why I would take a healthy Leslee back in a heartbeat. He may not be all-conference, but he is big enough, strong enough, mature enough, experienced enough and talented enough to play and play effectively in the B1G. If he doesn't come back (which by all accounts he will not), I can almost guarantee that next year we are going to be saying "I wish we had Leslee for just one more year" just like we are all saying right now "I wish Leslee had not gotten hurt and that he could play all year". How is it any different next year than this year in that regard. There is a very good chance that Terran will not return next year. That would leave an open scholarship. In fact, I bet Miles is almost counting on it. This will be evidenced by the fact that he will continue to recruit for the spring signing period and I would bet that he will obtain at least one verbal commit before the end of the season (thus, before TP makes his final decision about returning). If he does, are you going to be saying that Miles shouldn't have obtained a verbal commitment b/c we don't know if TP is leaving and we don't have anyone that could/should be subject to attrition? All I am saying is that I doubt that even Miles is going to be able to go out and find a legit big man that can come in NEXT year and be as good or better than Leslee. And if he cannot, then I would rather have Leslee next year and let the future years sort themselves out. He has already signed 3 quality freshman for 2015. That is plenty to keep the youth movement in place. What we need next year is an experienced and legit big man and Leslee fits that bill. In the end, all this discussion doesn't matter b/c by all reports Miles doesn't think Leslee would qualify for a 6th year even if he applied (although that surprises me considering his history of injury). I am just speaking in hypothetical and IMO I would take Leslee next year over an open scholarship without hesitation whatsoever.

As much as I like Leslee, we're better off in the long run if we have his scholarship for next year. Wow. With all due respect, I completely disagree with you, ajb, shortdust and whoever else shares this sentiment. The only way I could maybe understand this thinking is if you are convinced that Leslee is just injury plagued and will never be able to play more than spot minutes and be less than 100% while doing it. But if he could come back healthy by next season and play a full season, I would take him in a heartbeat and count our blessings. If Leslee came back, he would only be here for next year. He is not eating a scholarship for 4 years or anything like that. Just next year, which he would be playing and contributing. Unless something completely unexpected happens in the spring signing period, NU is going to be in the same, or possibly worse, situation in regards to lack of big men next year. Miles did not sign a big man in this class (and no, I do not consider Morrow a big man; especially not in the B1G as a freshman). NU will lose Moses and Leslee and it not bringing in anyone to replace them. I have already seen enough of Hammond to know that he probably is not going to be force down low for a while, if ever. Leslee has proven he can be an decent, if not solid, big man. Why would any fan of NU not want him for a full season next year, when we could make a serious run at the sweet 16? Lets put it another way. If Leslee were healthy this year, he would easily be in the top 6 or 7 IMO (I think he is better than Rivers, he just can't start b/c Miles needs to switch between Pitchford and Leslee). Why would we not want one of our top 7 players back? If anyone thinks all these freshman are going to walk in and just start dominating, you need to reconsider. Think about Tai and how he struggled last year. Look at Tarin Smith this year. Fuller? I know that the new guys are more highly ranked (although not more highly than Tai according to some), but that doesn't mean they are physically ready for the B1G, or that they can master Miles' defensive scheme quickly, etc. Besides, NONE of them are centers. Unless Miles magically and remarkably pulls a rabbit out of his had and lands a top-notch juco big man in the spring, I would much rather have Leslee return and be our backup center all year next year, hands down. If Miles has a 5 star wing that also wants to sign in the spring, then he can sign him and room will make itself available like it always does due to attrition.

Even coach Miles questioned whether Benny was cut out for this league and basically asked him to leave his first year. Benny said no and proved himself worthy of playing time. But if you are going to label fans as fickle in regards to Benny, then you will have to include Miles as being fickle himself.

Norm, I think you are reading too much negativity into my post. In many ways, I see my perspective as just the opposite in many ways. For instance, the reason I think we may have concerns about TP's shot selection is because I have so much confidence in other players like Shavon, Walt, and even others like Tai. I think we have at least a 3-headed monster. I am very high on ALL THREE (with Tai possibly being the small 4th head). That is why I want to see a slightly more balanced offense. UNLIKE those past years under Doc and Collier, we now have multiple talented players. I am not down on this team or the starter at all. I do have some concern about our bench. Even Miles has said that we have "6" and then the rest if up in the air. I agree. Last year, I think we had a solid 8 at the beginning of the year b/c we had Gallegos and Leslee (we also had Biggs, but that took a turn in a different direction). I do think Moses will get minutes b/c he must and he will at least be a body that can bang. I just hope he doesn't foul b/c fouls hurt us last year and we don't need to repeat that. Anyway, I am VERY high on that Shields kid and that Walt kid. And I have always (even at the beginning of last year) been high on Tai's potential--Let's just hope he has the confidence and shooting touch to achieve it. I actually like Tai starting b/c I like his height at the PG position. It opens up a lot of opportunities on the defensive end to switch and do other team defense strategies. No doubt, Benny is a better on-ball (one-on-one) defender, but Tai brings his own strengths and I actually thought he was becoming a decent defender by the end of last year. In years past, I believe I had ample reason to be pessimistic, I am not going there this year or in this post. I am just raising questions that I think may determine whether this team is really good or elite. The conference is loaded again this year. Every team feels it is better than last year. Every team has new guys coming in that they are counting on to do big things. Many of those teams have 4 and 5 star recruits and McDonals All-Americans. NU will have to be on the top of its game to finish in the top third of the league this year. These are some areas I think will be important for our success.

I have read the board. I have listened to the interviews. I went to the scrimmage. Now it is time for the games to begin. Excited about the season, this is what we have all been waiting for. Nebraska in the top 25. A team in the national picture. A program on the rise. I am doing my best to sit back and enjoy the ride. But I can't help but have a few questions and thoughts as this new season begins: 1. Is this year's "bench" better than last years? - 2. Will they maintain that "eye of the tiger" and relentless defensive effort and attitude that got them to the tournament last year when they were the underdogs fighting to reach the top? 3. (And I know this one will be very controversial, but) "will some of us be concerned at various points throughout this season that Petteway is still taking too many ill-advised shots?" My initial thoughts: 1. I keep debating this one in my mind. If Leslee were healthy and playing, there would be no doubt that this year's bench is superior to last year. But without Leslee, I am not so sure and will probably have to wait and see before I can truly believe it. Although Gallegos continued to struggle shooting last year, he was a 5th year senior who knew the league, how to play tough defense, and how to play smart and aggressive. Gallegos started 18 games and played an average of 28 minutes per game. That was 3rd on the entire team for total minutes played. Regarding Leslee, I have mentioned this in another thread, but even though he only played 16.8 minutes per game, his "per 40 minutes" averages for points and rebounds far exceed the production of Moses last year. Losing Leslee is a blow and I don't think Moses is going to replace his leadership or production (although I do hold out a slimmer of hope that he can pull off the miracle and return in January). This means that the combination of Smith and Fuller have to make up for the loss of Gallegos and the drop-off from Leslee to Moses. I don't know yet, will have to wait and see. 2. This team was very poor on defense early last year. To make things worse, they fouled like crazy and put opponents to the line at an alarming rate. Fortunately, after 5 or so games into conference play (when it was absolute do or die time), something clicked and they cranked up the intensity and effort and communication on defense. Can they duplicate that level of intensity right out of the gate this year? I am sure Benny can, but what about the team as a whole? And the freshman, will they "get it" at all this year, let alone early on in the season? These are questions that remain to be seen. 3. And last, I know some on here will think I am somehow bashing or putting down Terran for even asking that question. I assure you I am not. There is no doubt that it was Terran who took the team on his back last year and carried it through much of that winning streak that catapulted NU to the tourney. However, just b/c Terran did and can do great things does not mean he is infallible. And there is no doubt in my mind that Terran and his poor shot selection played at least some part in NU's early struggles last year. As I said above, I have listened to all the interviews of the coaches and players throughout the summer an this preseason. And I have heard on multiple occasions from the coaches and players (and I particularly recall Coach Harriman say it at least twice) that on a good number of days in practice, Shavon Shields is the best player on the floor. Remember, Shavon came out like gang-busters last year, But then he tweaked his knee and he was not the same player until late in the season when he finally fully recovered. It was during the time that Shavon was hurting that Terran carried the team. But by all accounts Shavon is fully healthy now. And by all accounts he is stronger and playing better than ever. So do we still need Terran to be superman and take 15+ shots a game? Or do we need him to be more selective and take what the offense gives him and not force. it. Even last year, when Shavon was not healthy much of the year, Shavon shot 44.3% FG. Terran shot 42.6%. Beyond that, last year Pitchford shot 47.3% FG and a remarkable 41% on 3-Point shots. By all accounts, Walt is shooting the ball better than ever. Both Shavon and Walt were more efficient scorers last year, and they should be much improved this year. Now, I fully understand that Terran had to take a lot of very difficult shots b/c he was the "go to" guy late in the clock. I get that. But Terran also hucked up A LOT of quick 25 ft bombs with 30 seconds left on the clock. Or an off-balance fade away shot that wasn't necessary. And so forth. When Terran drives, he has one thing on his mind--trying to put the ball in the basket. But are there times he should look to the corner for an open 3 for Walt? Or to the elbow for an open pass to Shavon? Terran can get tunnel vision sometimes and we need him to remain team focused for all 40 minutes every game. And again, I do not thing Terran is selfish or anything like that, I just think he is so competitive that he gets in a combat mode and sometimes fails to stay the course with the offense and the system that has been implemented for the best team success

A few days ago I was flipping through the channels when the student section for the Kansas Jayhawks showed up on the screen. The students were going absolutely berserk during PRE-GAME introductions. Naturally, I automatically assumed this was a replay of a big time conference game from last year or some prior year. Yet, when I hit the "info" button on the remote, I was shocked to see that I was watching a live broadcast of an EXHIBITION game. The camera kept panning to the students, and the students were relentless in their enthusiasm and energy. When the game started, Kanas got a rebound and turned it into a transition bucket. It was nothing spectacular, not a thunder dunk or even a dunk. But the students went into an absolute frenzy. This continued throughout the time I watched. I will admit I did not watch the whole game, or even a majority of the game (I just couldn't get myself to devote 2 hours to another teams pre-season exhibition game), but it was clear from what I watched that the student section at Kansas "just gets it!" They treat ANY game, even an exhibition game, like it is the biggest game of the year. It did not matter that the game didn't even count for the record book. It didn't matter that the opponent was WAY overmatched. It didn't matter that everyone in the building knew it was going to be a blowout. They were supporting the team and players like it was a championship game. That energy had to be contagious, and it has to rub off on players and recruits. The Nebraska student section was good last year. But there is still a whole nother level out there for you if you want to go and strive for it!

Interesting article. Reading between the lines, it sounds like Moses is struggling at the moment. The number one thing that concerns me about the team this year is the loss of Leslee and the lack of a quality backup big man. I know Leslee struggled a bit down the stretch last year with some lingering injury issues, but he was a huge player early in the year and still was a very valuable backup later in the year. I do not see him returning at all this year (no matter what the coaches are saying about him shooting for January). I have never understood all the hype and excitement over Moses. He averaged 1.9 pts and 2.8 rebounds on a mediocre Georgetown last year as a redshirt junior in 13 minutes per game. Leslee averaged 5.4 pts and 4.8 rebounds per game in 16 minutes per game.. Leslee was easily twice as good. Once a player is a RS junior, there is no need to go back and look at what his high school ranking is. HS rankings are completely irrelevant at that point. There is a reason he only played 13 minutes a game on a mediocre team last year. Why should we expect him to come to a top 25 team and suddenly be a major factor? I realize people only hope/expect him to come in and rebound and play good defense, but I have even questioned that because based on all reports Moses was a foul machine at Georgetown (and his rebounding numbers are not good either). One of my biggest pet peeves is the saying "Well, at least he is good for 5 fouls." There is NOTHING good about a sub coming in and getting 5 fouls. Last year, especially early in the season, NU lost games because it was fouling so blasted much that it was putting the opponent in the bonus with more than 10 minutes to go in each half. Accumulating too many fouls was probably the biggest hindrance of the team. Why in the world would be want to put someone in who will foul even more? We do not need someone to come in and foul the opponent. With that said, I hope upon hope that Moses is simply struggling to grasp the new system and concepts and that he can get better and be a valuable defender and rebounder. I hope upon hope that Molinari can do his magic and in one short preseason can turn Moses into something that he has never been in 4 years of college basketball. But I am not counting on it at all. And I just feel like the Huskers are gong to be trying to work around that gaping hole (of a lack of any semblance of a big man) all year.

So Stanislas is 6'11" and Pitchford and Hammond are listed at 6'10". Ummmm??????