• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

Hoiberg gives upbeat report on his new-look Husker team

HuskerWeatherman

Feral Cat
20 Year Member
I’m a lot more skeptical about this than I am about the direction of the football team.

There's reason for skepticism with all of our major men's teams. We can choose which team we believe may be better going forward, but there's very limited historical evidence to support it.

For me, it's all about needing to see it first to believe it -- football, basketball, and baseball. Each of them will have enough talent to believe they could be better next season, but it's not like we've seen a bunch of evidence of coaches maximizing talent. All three teams will have significantly different rosters and starters -- so it's tough to gauge building chemistry quick enough to win.
 

Red Don

Tiger
Staff member
10 Year Member
Here's Jimmy Watkin's Take in the OWH on Coach Hoiberg's comments on the Huskers Radio Network:


One theme between NU’s newcomers: winning pedigree. Transfers Sam Griesel and Juwan Gary have played in the NCAA Tournament. Emmanuel Bandoumel never played through a losing season at SMU. Jamarques Lawrence won a state title at Roselle Catholic in New Jersey. Ramel Lloyd’s Sierra Canyon (CA) team went 26-5 his senior season. And junior college big man Blaise Keita helped Coffeyville win an NJCAA national championship in 2020-21.

“We’re starting to build (the program) with guys that have had success,” Hoiberg said.
 

Bleed Red

Scout Team
5 Year Member
There's reason for skepticism with all of our major men's teams. We can choose which team we believe may be better going forward, but there's very limited historical evidence to support it.

For me, it's all about needing to see it first to believe it -- football, basketball, and baseball. Each of them will have enough talent to believe they could be better next season, but it's not like we've seen a bunch of evidence of coaches maximizing talent. All three teams will have significantly different rosters and starters -- so it's tough to gauge building chemistry quick enough to win.
The baseball team won a championship under Bolt. Is that not seeing it? Or is it truly "what have you done lately?".
 

Huskerfan69

Junior Varsity
2 Year Member
The baseball team won a championship under Bolt. Is that not seeing it? Or is it truly "what have you done lately?".

just like Mike Anderson went to the CWS... oh wait, he was fired a few years later.

The point? it is much easier to win when using another coaches recruited and coached players.
 

Bleed Red

Scout Team
5 Year Member
just like Mike Anderson went to the CWS... oh wait, he was fired a few years later.

The point? it is much easier to win when using another coaches recruited and coached players.
It is? I'm not sure how you would prove or quantify that assertion. Many people believe it is more difficult to win with players not recruited to fit "their system".

As for the point, the poster said he wanted to see success first....Bolt had success. Most people would see winning a conference title as success.
 

Huskerfan69

Junior Varsity
2 Year Member
It is? I'm not sure how you would prove or quantify that assertion. Many people believe it is more difficult to win with players not recruited to fit "their system".

As for the point, the poster said he wanted to see success first....Bolt had success. Most people would see winning a conference title as success.

Well, we have had two coaches that came in and won right away, but then after those players were gone fell flat. What everyone else talks about is irrelevant, we have seen it twice at NU.. once with Anderson and then again with Bolt.
 
Last edited:
It is? I'm not sure how you would prove or quantify that assertion. Many people believe it is more difficult to win with players not recruited to fit "their system".

As for the point, the poster said he wanted to see success first....Bolt had success. Most people would see winning a conference title as success.
I'm more inclined to believe that a coach in his/her first two years has it as easy as it gets. I think the "system" argument is an excuse for early underperformance. In the first two years, you have the ear of experienced players, typically coming off losing seasons, who are eager to learn something new and the messaging from their coach more easily captures their full attention. I believe that is why we see so many new coaches take terrible teams to HUGE improvement in one season. Think John Blake to Bob Stoops. Similar things can occur with position coaching. Think Craig Bohl to Bo Pelini.

Coaches who struggle to change their messaging to maintain player attention will struggle beyond Year 3 regardless of their X and O knowledge base. This is especially true if the team struggles to get results on the field.

Reasons for both hope and despair when setting expectations for 2022 and beyond.
 

Bleed Red

Scout Team
5 Year Member
Well, we have had two coaches that came in and won right away, but then after those players were gone fell flat. What everyone else talks about is irrelevant, we have seen it twice at NU.. once with Anderson and then again with Bolt.
Very good point...anything that happens twice should be universally accepted as the norm going forward. Two times is all the proof I need.
 
Top