NUdiehard

Sai is not a "big man". He is basically the same size as Shavon Shields.

I guess I would consider landing a recruit like Sai as "walking" not "running". Landing recruits that are a lower caliber than Sai will not allow us to "get better". Even Sai himself is a relative average recruit in comparison to what all the other B1G teams are signing as we speak.

See my post above

I understand what you are saying, but I don't really agree with it. If NU ever wants to reach the top half of the conference and become a regular NCAA contender, then it is going to have to start landing some major prospects (and I'm not even certain I would call Sai a major prospect). I hate to break to you, but major prospects will ALWAYS have other quality options. Unless that prospect was born and raised in Nebraska--which is highly unlikely--then there is ALWAYS going to be a "home state" school and most likely, if that player is a major prospect, then that home state is also going to offer him. Or, as in this case, there may be multiple schools in the home state (ie, Arizone, ASU, etc), and maybe 1 or 2 of those home state schools will offer. Of, if it is not the home state, there are still going to almost ALWAYS be other more "prominent" schools with more tradition and NCAA wins, etc. At some point, this program must overcome those obstacles. That really is the only way to get this program where we want it to be. Losing Sai is not going to make or break this program or Coach Miles and I am not going to lose any sleep over it. But I will never understand that attitude of so many who seem to be happy (some almost giddy) simply because we are "competing" with other average BCS programs for a recruit. ASU is no UNC or KU. Yes, it was his home state, but as stated above, every player has a home state. If we succumb to that excuse every time, then we will never get a major recuit. At some point, what needs to be done must be done. It certainly won't be easy, but it is the only way.

http://journalstar.com/sports/huskers/mens-basketball/hoops-ticket-sales-surpass/article_e5c3f790-b110-11e2-a7df-001a4bcf887a.html I will actually be quite upset if they sell out of the student tickets. I know that sounds strange, but let me explain. In the initial plans for the arena, they were going to have students surround three full sides of the court at the floor level. Although not quite as good as the 4 full sides that it used to have, I thought this plan was a major step forward as students are BY FAR the best fans to have at floor level for energy and excitement. However, this plan was later scrapped and replaced with the 2 sides of the court we currently have. The ostensible justification for the change was that they did not believe there was enough student demand to warrant having 3 sides designated for students. I didn't buy it then and I definitely don't buy it now. This is just another example of the Ath. Dept. having a chance to correct a massive mistake they previously made (reducing the students to just 2 sides) and then peeing down their leg when it became final decision time. There will never again be an opportunity to correct this latest blunder. Now that those seats are designated for non-students, there is no going back. The mor prudent decision would have been to keep the 3 sections for students and see what the student demand actually was before making a permanent decision. If students didn't step up and buy them, then the Ath. Dept. could always open the seats up to the general public later. But they didn't do that, and now it looks like many students will either be denied the opportunity to buy season tickets, or relegated to the rafters when they should be sitting courtside creating havoc for the opponent.

I agree with this completely. There are approximately 330 NCAA Div. 1 teams. There are only a handful of kids that leave early for the draft each year (and there are even fewer that are true "One and Done, leaving after their freshman year). Although these early entrants to the draft may affect the scoring average of a few teams at the top (ie, Kentucky, Duke, etc.), that effect is nominal when averaged out over 330 Div. 1 teams. Scoring is down across all of college basketball, including at NU. NU has only had a couple players leave early in its history (and even those weren't until after their junior year), yet the scoring is still down. Besides, you must consider the effect of early entrants to the draft on both sides of the court. To the extent these kids are leaving early, their defensive capabilities are also leaving early. Thus, that teams opponents should be able to score more against them as well. For instance, Kentucky would have scored more points this year with Anthony Davis on the team, but it also would have held its opponents to fewer points, thus negating any statistical difference on the whole (ie, 60 v. 55 = 65 v. 50). One last thing (and this is just a personal pet peeve of mine). The phrase "One and Done" is not really an accurate description of the issue. There are very, very few players that actually leave after only just one year in college. For instance, even a guy like Trey Burke at Michigan returned for his sophmore year. He technically is not a "One and Done". He played 2 full years in college, not just one. The majority of players that leave early remain in college for at least 2 years. Does anyone know the number of freshman from this year who are declaring for the 2013 NBA draft?

I don't think this issue is that there aren't any kids out there any more who can shoot, I think the problem is that the way the game is currently called rewards strength, quickness and athleticism over skill. Thus, if a coach is choosing between the more athletic, but less skilled player vs. the more skilled (ie, better shooter, passer, etc) but less athletic, most coaches are choosing the athletic kids. That coach knows that it is easier to teach a really athletic kid how to grab, clutch, hold and push than it is to teach a kid how to shoot. He also knows that if his tall, strong athletic kid is grabbing, clutching, holding and pushing the less athletic but skilled opponent, that opponent isn't going to be able to make many shots because he won't be able to get open enough to shoot it. Thus, the product we see on the floor most nights is a bunch of athletic, but less skilled players, grabbing, clutching and holding rather than swishing shots. To me, the only way to change this is to change the way the game is called such that it rewards skill more than, or at least just as much as, athleticism. Stop allowing the defender to grab, clutch, arm-guard, hand-check and hold, and you will start seeing more kids making shots because coaches will start recruiting skill over athleticism. This skilled kids are still out there, the game just has to give coaches an incentive to actually recruit them and play them.

http://www.huskers.com/SportSelect.dbml?SPSID=23&SPID=24&DB_OEM_ID=100&Q_SEASON=1985

I am almost certain that I read an article a while back (February or March) about how Vooch had actually lost 20 lbs during the season. Maybe I heard it on the radio, but I thought it was in an article. That would be a similar situation to Diaz who struggled with losing weight during the season, and then had much more success putting on weight during the offseason. Dimes, what is remarkable about this is when we consider that Hoppen played his senior year at 6'11" 235 lbs. John Matzke was a 6' 7" senior at 190 lbs on the same team. You recently mentioned that you were watching tape of his games and noted how much less physical it was at that time. This is how the game has changed. Now a post player must either be an unbelievable athlete, or over 250 lbs to even get on the floor. This is largely because of how the game is officiated which rewards brute physicality over skill level.

The last report I saw in the paper said that Miles had not yet had his season-ending meeting with the players yet. I assume he is waiting to see how many players he signs in the spring signing period because that will determine whether he has to cut someone loose. It would be difficult to have a banquet and celebrate a player's achievements if you then had to meet with the same player a few days later and give them the bad news. Maybe that is why he chose not to have a banquet at all. Of course, this is all speculation on my part, just adding 2 + 2.

He is fortunate to have that option. If he had not RS his first year at CU, he would already have burned 2 years of eligibility, thus negating any possibility of going to a junior college for a year. Being able to play his sophmore season at juco could allow him to gain attention and possibly sign with another div. 1 school in 2014/15 with 2 full years of eligibility remaining.

In general this is true, but not entirely. There are other factors. Every missed shot is an opportunity for the opponent to rebound and initiate a fast break whereas every made shot requires the opponent to step behind the baseline before inbounding the ball, thereby allowing the defense to set up. It is rare for a team to get a fast break opporunity off a made shot. Thus, there is value in a made shot beyond just the 2 points. I suppose you could argue that a missed shot is an opportunity for an offensive rebound, but I would imagine most coaches prefer to make the basket a higher percentage of the time if the net scoring result was the same.

This is how you get a foot in the door though. I work for a baseball facility here in portland and we have some great connections to kids as our staff is full of former pros, college coaches, and pro scouts. Two of our guys were just working for us before becoming college coaches and got their jobs because they were able to steer players to said school. This is a huge reason why guys like Chin Coleman now have a job in college as they were able to have great connections and in-roads to kids and because of this connection got himself a new job. If Barnes wanted a job in college, funneling players to a school would be the number one priority to get himself an interview. Even if it doesnt work at one school people at other schools would take notice of said connections and do their best to hire him to gain those ties. Thats why you see so many AAU coaches get hired because they have connections to areas to get players. I get that completely. But maybe he decided to steer them somewhere else since he didn't think he was ever going to get a legitimate shot here. Again, I don't anything about what really happened. Just saying that simply b/c he hasn't "steered" any to NU doesn't mean he hasn't steered them somewhere else or that he couldn't ever do so in the future. Just like any other person in his type of position, he has not obligation to NU any more than any other school at this point.

For the record, I am not advocating hiring Barnes or anyone else. I don't know much about him honestly. My point was that, at this point, I don't really care what a guy's "credentials" are, or who else is trying to hire him, if I know he can bring in big time recruits. I don't know if Barnes can or can't do it. I am just using someone like him as an example. Norm, as for you point that he hasn't "delivered" anybody yet, I guess I don't really get that. He isn't employed by NU. He isn't under any obligation to deliver anybody here. In fact, let's say Barnes did have enough influence to direct Akoy to a school (and yes, I realize this is a complete hypothetical). Do you really think he would direct Akoy to Miles after he tried to get an interview for the NU assistant position and was given the cold shoulder? Really? If anything, it probably would have just made him upset and turned him against NU. Are you saying he must deliver multiple big time recruits before he can even be considered for the job? Seriously? There are AAU or H.S. "coaches" who are hired all the time simply for the "prospect" of bringing one recruit with them. If Barnes was willing to direct players to NU without having to be put on staff, then Miles obviously would have no need to put him on staff. That is the whole point! And again, my point is NOT to debate whether Barnes should or should not be hired. I am simply using him as a hypothetical example.

nothing against Adam because he does fine work in Houston but if he wanted to be a coach in college, why isnt he trying to get in the door anywhere? Hes got a good gig in Houston and can be a good funnel for talent to Nebraska but if he was a B1G worthy assistant he would have plenty of suitors already beating down his door and would be coaching. If Barnes could have helped us land Akoy, I wouldn't care if he spent the last 10 years working at McDonalds. Miles hired Johnson instead and what did that get us? Hiring assistant coaches is a bit of a dicey business. It isn't all about "grinding your way to the top" and "earning your stripes" like it used to be. Its all about who you know and who you can help us get. It may not seem right and it may not be "fair", but it is what it is. I personally think losing Akoy was a big blow to the rate at which Miles can build this program. It is why we are now still trying to figure out how to fill the gap in the paint. We may be trying to fill that for years to come. One guy cannot change a program, but one guy can sure help a lot. And then if you add in a guy like Webster or maybe another diamond in the rough (Fuller?) and you are off and running. If I knew Barnes could come in now and help us land a guy of Akoy's status (or better?) for next year or even 2014, I would hire him in a heartbeat. That would still be better than what some assistants will do in 5 years at a program.

Almost all asistant coaches have ambitions to be a HC. Scott Spinelli had ambitions to be a HC while he was at NU 8 years ago, and he still has ambitions to be a HC, yet he is still and asistant coach. Harriman may become a HC someday, but highly doubt that day will be anytime in the next 5 years. So the whole goal is to keep him here at NU for at least those next 5 years. If Harriman makes a move in the next 5 years, it most likely will be to go to another school as a an assistant coach. Miles cannot prevent that 100% from happening, but he sure as heck can make the decision more difficult for him. I guarantee you Harriman would stop and give a looooong pause before taking the job at a school like Maryland or NC St if it would rerquire him not only to move his family again, but also take a paycut from $600,000 to $300,000, while at the same time moving to a city with a higher cost-of-living than Lincoln. As for Smith, I am not worried about him. He may leave someday, but I haven't seen anything to indicate he warrants a substantial pay increase. He appears to be a great guy and an excellent on-the-court coach (scouting, game plans, game day, etc), but I haven't seen anything to indicate he is an elite recruiter. And that is where the money is at, especially with assitant coaches. If you get a very good/great recruiter at NU, you need to do whatever it takes to keep him here as long as possible. As long as Miles at least makes the effort, I would not fault him if Harriman leaves. But if he doesn't show that he is willing to do everything he can (ie, bump his salary to $500,000+), then it would be on Miles IMO.

Losing Johnson hurts, but the assistant Miles simply cannot afford to lose is Harriman. I have felt for a while that Miles should bump Harriman's salary to $500,000+ and make a commitment to keep him no matter the cost. I am not happy about losing Johnson but will get over it. I will be very upset if we lose Harriman, especially if Miles and the athletic dept. don't step up and pay him an amount that will make it extremely difficult for him to leave. Harriman is probably the ceiling as far as the qualify of an assitant coach we can get at NU. When we get one like him, we need to do whatever is necessary to keep him. Unfortunately, I haven't seen any indication that Miles as the AD are willing to make that sort of commitment to Harriman and the program.

There are no more rules anymore. At least not any with any consequences. Just give them the obligatory slap on the wrist and Hoiberg will be on his merry way the tourney again next year.

Don't think it is laziness. The players are just taking the path of least resistance so they grab instead of using good footwork. They go over the back on rebounds instead of working for position. They just pitch a tent in the lane instead of developing good offensive moves to get to the basket. I don't know WHAT the refs are doing but I doubt they are lazy. Systemically, the game has become a loosely organized game of street ball and I, for one, don't like it as well. It has nothing to do with being lazy. I actually think the UL players played unbelievably hard! The reason they foul all the time is b/c the refs allow them to do it and it is very effective. There simply is no disputing that you can stop the offensive player better by grabbing him than by simply moving next to him. I can't believe that would ever be in dispute. It is incredibly difficult for an offensive player to even dribble the ball down the court when the opposing defender is litterally riding on your back the entire way, bumping you, hacking you, grabbing you, pushing you off course, etc. If the defender was simply "moving his feet" along side the ball-handler without touching him, that would not be nearly as effective. Same goes for post players, etc. Heck, it is hard to even inbounds the ball when the opponent is allowed to litterally bear hug you when you are trying to get open. They foul because it works better. That is not the question. The problem is that it is not supposed to be allowed under the rules of the game, and it mucks up the game and makes it ugly and, at times, unwatchable.

As long as he is able to push, pull, grab, hold, hack and otherwise foul the opponent incessantly, he should do just fine.

I agree with this 100%. The college game has almost become an embarrassment. It is legalized assault. It is completely out of hand and it is ruining the game. It is an easy fix. Simply call the fouls every time down the court starting at the beginning of the season and teams will adjust. The NBA has started this process and virtually eliminated all the hand-checking. If it can be done in the NBA, it certainly can be done in college. The finals tonight was a case-in-point. UL made some great plays, but they mugged UM all night. There were possessions where UL fouled UM 10 times on a single possession, and not one of them was called. UM was the more talented team, but UL knows how to foul better. That should not be what determines a national champion.

Wasn't biggs a juco all american? His offers didn't really blow up. Us and Okie st. Biggs was named a juco All American after his freshman year? I did not know that. Hmmm. You sure about that? Biggs got to practice with Michigan for a whole year then play Juco? I did not know that. I know it was after biggs soph season, but they were the same grade/age when they became JUCO AMs Not trying to argue, but I don't see Sai's offers blowing up. Especially this late in the game. I believe that Sai Tummala is a better get than Leslee smith though. Exactly. Sai is not a true freshman, he is a RS freshman. Huge difference.

College basketball has become a disgrace. Louisville is a total fraud. All they do is mug the opponent every single second they are on the floor. The officiating of the college game is atrocious and embarrassing. Its not basketball, it is simply a rugby match on the court. Michigan is simply 100X better because they are winning despite an embarrassment of fouls that are not being called on UL.

Safe to say in hindsight. Do you sign a guy you don't like who may have qualificiation issues when you are also teetering on the APR bubble? Do you sign a guy you don't like when you are going to have room for a much bigger class the next year? Seems to me...considering what our expectations were for this year.....there was more potential downside than good to bring him in. I don't get the APR point. How is Fahro any more of an APR risk than any other recruit? If Fahro had not qualified, I don't think he would have counted against our APR since he never would have played in a game. Besides, I don't remember there being major concerns about his qualification status. None more than any other recruit. And beyond that, I think this whole APR issue is overblown right now. I have not seen any credible source say that NU is currently walking a thin line with the APR, only rumors and innuendo right now on that. Fahro is not a huge deal either way. All I am saying is that looking back, it definitely would have been better to keep him. Miles was unable to land another recruit for last year and has been unable to land sufficient quality recruits this year to justify not keeping him. Of course Miles may have hoped he could get better, but ulitimately it is his job to evaluate where things are at and make the right choices. I just don't think it would have been much of a risk at all to keep him. Miles stll would have had 4 scholarships available for this class, and he always has the option of letting a a few players go to make more room if he needs it. For instance, would you rather have Fahro next year or BP? Miles knew last year that AA and Ubel were going to graduate and that Vooch was going to need a lot of strenght conditioning before he is ready. Miles knew enough to make an informed decision. If you want to take it one step further, you could say the mistake was in choosing BP over Fahro if you are so concerned about saving scholarships for this class.

Fahro averaged 9.7pts/game (47.4% from the field) and 4.5 rebouds/game this season for UAB. He is 6'10" and shot 80% on free throws, all in just 25.5 minutes per game. If you average that out over a 40 minutes per game average, I am guessing this is very close to the production of Ubel this year. And Fahro is only a junior. Looking back, I don't see how it could be disputed that it was a mistake to not keep Fahro. As mentioned, his scholarship was given to Menke last year. There would have been almost no risk in keeping him.