wiuhusker

#1 UNC

#2 Michigan State

#2 Tennessee

#6 Villanova

#6 Iowa State 

#12 Murray State

#12 Oregon

#13 Vermont

#13 UC Irvine

I might be interested in something like this. What site do you use?

40 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Then what’s the problem that people think the shot clock is going to fix?

 

i personally think they are down from when I was in HS. 

I think one of the biggest reasons for lower scores is the amount of zone defense that gets played. That and the 3 pointer or layup mentality that is taking over basketball. Lost is the day of a mid range jump shot. 

12 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

That’s what a lot of coaches are trying to do and it sucks. My opinion is that many high schools don’t have the athletic type players to make that work and have high scores like people want. 

 

Now, if I’m wrong, then I’m open to explanation as to why scores are lower than they used to be. 

 

I dont believe irs because of not having a shot clock. 

I don't think it is a shot clock issue either. It's coaches that want their teams to move the ball for 30-35 seconds before even looking at the rim instead of running things to get a good look early. Or letting their team get out in transition and get easy layups. i attribute it to coaches wanting to have total control over a game. 

22 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

I don’t agree with your comments on offense. That is what I see coaches trying to do and it sucks. 

 

That works for your top AAU teams with freaks as athletes that play 100 games a year with each other. 

 

Nebradka highschool teams need to be thinking about how to create offense similar to how Princeton used to. Good sound offensive philosophy that is taught to the kids. With an offense that flows and is continuous. But, that’s not cool. 

 

When you say they have a set play, sometimes they do, but it’s a set play where if it doesn’t work, it’s adlib from there. 

 

To me a high school varsity basketball player shouldn't have to be confined to a set offense or princeton style offense every trip down. Let the kids play through a free flowing style and teach them what they can and can't do within the structure of said offense and let them go. Use film room to teach and correct things. Too many coaches confine their players too much by running offenses that may not put their athletes in the best position to win and be successful. 

2 minutes ago, teachercd said:

Could be, to me that is not fundamentals though that is, like you mentioned, coaching.  

 

Don't get me started on summer/select/AAU/Club...

I work at a facility in Omaha that is connected to one of the Summer AAU clubs so we could have a very lengthy chat about those. The guys that run the one I work at are very knowledgeable and do things the right way. But some of the stories they tell me crazy. 

7 minutes ago, teachercd said:

Are fundamentals taking a hit?  I know we like to say that but college basketball and NBA is played at such a crazy athletic level I feel like learning a 10 foot bank shot from a set position is sort of pointless.  Are shooting %'s higher-same-lower than 30 years ago?  I have no idea.  Is FT% better or worse?

 

I don't know, I really don't watch a ton of HS basketball if I don't have to.  But college seems fine.

 

I think the fundamentals people are referring to are kids learning how to play within the flow of a game without having a set offense. Learning how to read different types of screens, different ways to get open, how to be effective without having the ball in your hand. A lot of times if a kid doesn't have the ball in their hand they have no idea what they can do to help the team. Little things like that are taking a hit because I don't think there's enough good coaches both in HS and summer teams that can teach them properly. 

5 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

Sorry I didn't mention I played and was involved in HS basketball too with a coach that's now in the Nebraska hall of fame.  Didn't think that was really relevant.  But....now that we have that out in the open.

 

Let me ask you this.  When I was coming up through middle school and high school in the 70s and 80s, there wasn't a shot clock.  There wasn't a three point line.  We had shorts that barely made it to mid thigh.  I remember games where total scores were 160+.  I remember some games where I was wondering if our team was going to go over 100.  Never did.  But came close. This also wasn't abnormal.  Sure, we had those games where we would score in the 50s.  But, it wasn't abnormal for us to score in the 70s or 80s.  

 

What's changed?  Why do we all of a sudden need a shot clock so we can have scoring?  I'll give you my opinion.  Basketball offenses suck now days along with fundamentals.  Maybe we need a shot clock so that you don't have to sit through a game with a total score in the 70s.  But, it's just a bandaid that is covering up the real problem.  

 

Develop and teach real basketball team offense that includes good player movement and ball movement to go with it to get open shots or easy back door layups.  Stop promoting individual kids to be hot dogs.  And...for CHRIST'S SAKE....teach a kid that when you're at the basket, put the ball up instead of always having to dish it back out to some hot dog at the three point line to lob up a prayer.

 

I loved watching my son play and he had a very successful career in HS.  But, I'll agree with you with one thing, the overall product on the floor sucks....I just don't think it's a lack of a shot clock issue and I actually think that, in the big picture, it will promote even less development of offenses.  

I agree with most of this. My brother and I graduated high school 4 years apart and both of our teams were successful given what our high school boys basketball history was. The team my senior year tried to make every game a track meet and to be honest we were terrible at trying to stall. My brothers team walked the ball up the floor every possession. Not sure what caused the coach to completely change philosophies over the years but it was 2 totally different teams.

And while fundamentals are taking a hit in HS basketball, one could argue the bigger issue is coaches needing to be too involved in the game. If you have good enough players let them play and let the athletes be athletes. Too much needing to call a set offense every possession. The biggest thing al shot clock would do would is it would force coaches to let the game be more free flowing which would be hard for most. 

There 100% needs to be some sort of a shot clock in high school. Some of the shoe circuits in the summer AAU season have adopted a 30 second shot clock. Now not every summer basketball player is going to play in college but lets not hinder the ones that are good enough. 

The biggest adjustment that could be made to help HS hoops is going to either 18 or 20 minute halves or potentially maybe making the switch to 4 10 minute quarters. I think making a change to one of those 2 options would be more beneficial than adding a shot clock. 

17 hours ago, gobiggergoredder said:

I saw something on this a few weeks ago. I don’t remember exactly but I think it had to do with “free running” or no shoes.

 

The theory was the our footwear, specifically the padded heel and thick soles,  prevent our foot development when it comes to strength and flexibility.  It was stated that the only reason to even wear footwear in endurance running was because of injuries associated with sharp/rough terrain.

 

i thought it was it was interesting.

You pretty much nailed it. Think of your body as a tree or plant. Your feet are the roots to what we do daily. I have seen many people with back, knee and hip pain have it all attributed back to having weak feet. Now does this mean to go start doing everything you do barefoot? Not really. It's a normal progression just like a weight lifting or running program. But the idea is that if your feet are strong and functioning as they should that it will keep the knee properly in line and functioning, which in turn helps the hips and so on.

This deal with Cam is something other than what is going on in the weight room. With the resources UNL has if there was any sort of warning sign I'm sure the proper precautions would have been taken. Especially given the events of last winter with the rhabdo episodes. 

1 hour ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

He was joking

Well that went right over my head. 

3 minutes ago, Ulty said:

Probably because of the bare footed weight lifting that we have been seeing in the photos. Half the team will have broken feet by the time August rolls around.

Actually barefoot lifting has shown to be very beneficial for the lower extremity if done and programmed properly. I would guess there's just something genetically weaker with Cam's lower half. 

Didn't we recently get a player from his high school? 

2 hours ago, sho said:

 

I was joking about @Roundball Shaman's earlier somment where Omaha couldn't get a team because we were too close to KC, and the Twin Cities.   Saying if Milwaukee could, Omaha easily could too.

I guess I completely missed the sarcasm part. My bad. But yes, if they are able to have 3 successful franchises I don't see why Omaha can't support one of them. 

2 hours ago, sho said:

 

it's also why Milwaukee will never be able to have any pro teams, it's too close to Chicago, Detroit, The Twin Cities.   

You mean like the Milwaukee NBA team that currently has the best record in their conference or the Milwaukee MLB team that won their division and was a game from the World Series? They also do a pretty damn good job supporting the Packers every year. 

Also Milwaukee is a 90 minute drive from the 3rd largest TV market in the U.S. 

1 hour ago, Roundball Shaman said:

Omaha won’t have a major league franchise in the four major sports anytime soon. A smaller population size and having proximity to Kansas City and the Twin Cities are two reasons.

 

The Cornhuskers are so popular that pro teams have a hard time finding their place. But the Huskers belong to the State... and Husker Nation. Will a day ever come when Omaha really has a major league team of its very own? What does Omaha want in its sports future?

 

I see the bolded part as a positive for Omaha having a major league franchise. Imagine all the people that travel to KC, Minneapolis, Denver and Chicago to see their team play or are fans of teams in those cities. I could easily see a large majority of people taking to and supporting a pro team here. 

I think an NBA would be the most successful franchise. You have 2 teams in this state that have had moderate to above average success that are in the top 10 in the nation for attendance. Might there be some lesser attended games when the bad teams come to town? Yes, but imagine ticket prices and the downtown area for when the big name teams and players show up to Omaha. I for one would be all in on this deal. 

1 hour ago, spurs1990 said:

I think when they make a new profile, that's the name that is in the template and it just wasn't changed. It's happened before, just a typo I think.

Figured it was something along those lines. Looks like it's fixed now. Just wasn't sure if there was something I was missing 

Anyone know why it says Henry in the poll up top? 

For me it's the Cardinals. Didn't have much of a choice growing up as that was The only option I was given from my dad and grandpa. Also grew up during the McGwire/Sosa HR battle. And behind Husker football, the amount of time I spend following Cardinals baseball is second. i'm a completely weirdo and will watch probably 120-130 full games of the cardianls each year. 

3 hours ago, Mavric said:

 

I never watch the NBA - at least until playoffs - so I don't really know if it's boring or not.  

 

But watching Harden play basically has to be like watching a one-on-one game.  He simply dominates the ball until he gets a shot.  So, yes, I would say that's boring.  Harden takes 200 dribbles and gets no assists on his points.  By contrast, Klay Thompson had a game a week or so ago where he scored 43 points and only dribbled 4 times to get those points.  That's basketball.  Not one-on-one with the other 8 guys watching.

 

My rule of thumb is usually if you can score as many points as shots you take from the field, you're being fairly efficient.  So he does OK from that standpoint.  But it's all the free throws he draws  that keep those numbers up there so I don't think it's a lot of fun to watch.

 

And I don't think it will work well in the playoffs.

I'll have to see if I can find the tweet but somewhere I saw where Harden averages 500 dribbles per game. I understand CP3 is hurt and he's all they have but he scored 61 and they beat the horrible Knicks by 4 points. 

Also his streak is at 263 consecutive points that have been unassisted. If I was a teammate of his that had to cover his defensive lapses then didn't get the ball on the other end I would be furious. 

3 minutes ago, The Murphinator said:

I hate his game so much. It is just hoist up 3's and then drive in the paint to draw fouls. 

The fact that some people (not on here) think he's one of the best offensive talents we've seen to me is crazy. Imagine what Jordan and Kobe would've done with these rules. 

Also he gets officiated completely different than every other NBA player out there. He shot more FT than 10 other teams tonight. That should not be happening. 

Am I the only one who thinks the current style of basketball Harden is playing is very boring? 61 is sweet and all but you missed 15 3's and had to shoot 25 FT to get there. 

There are very few players more deserving of being unanimously selected than Mo Rivera. Complete domination for the entirety of his career and there will never be a closer more dominant than he was, let alone with 1 pitch. 

48 minutes ago, Redux said:

 

You have to actually have an Offense to have an Offensive Game Plan.  

This is also very true. It's truly amazing we won some of the games we did that year with the offense we trotted out on the field. 

The Kenny Bell block is the worst one I think I've seen. 

Close runner up would be the entire offensive game plan in the 09 Texas game.