| | | |
NEBRASKA MICHIGAN |
|
| 115 | 44 Final 58 |
|
|
| | |
|
| | | |
517 | NEBRASKA | 113 | 115 | 518 | MICHIGAN | -4 | -4 |
|
|
| | |
|
| | | |
|
|
All Games | 12-7 | -0.6 | 6-9 | 4-8 | 65.3 | 31.2 | 43.4% | 33.8 | 61.4 | 28.1 | 38.1% | 35.8 | Road Games | 3-4 | -0.9 | 2-4 | 3-2 | 60.7 | 27.3 | 41.7% | 31.3 | 62.4 | 27.4 | 37.7% | 36.4 | Last 5 Games | 4-1 | +4 | 4-0 | 2-3 | 60.8 | 28.8 | 44.8% | 31.2 | 57.6 | 26.4 | 36.2% | 36.0 | Conference Games | 4-3 | +1.3 | 4-2 | 3-4 | 61.1 | 29.1 | 44.0% | 30.9 | 61.1 | 29.6 | 37.9% | 36.6 |
|
| |
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 65.3 | 31.2 | 22-51 | 43.4% | 5-18 | 30.5% | 16-22 | 71.8% | 34 | 7 | 10 | 19 | 6 | 13 | 3 | vs opponents surrendering | 67 | 31.1 | 24-56 | 42.6% | 6-19 | 33.8% | 13-19 | 69.3% | 34 | 9 | 12 | 19 | 6 | 13 | 3 | Team Stats (Road Games) | 60.7 | 27.3 | 21-50 | 41.7% | 5-17 | 27.1% | 15-21 | 71.0% | 31 | 6 | 9 | 21 | 6 | 12 | 3 | Stats Against (All Games) | 61.4 | 28.1 | 21-55 | 38.1% | 6-21 | 30.0% | 13-20 | 65.6% | 36 | 10 | 9 | 20 | 6 | 14 | 2 | vs opponents averaging | 70.9 | 33.5 | 25-56 | 44.8% | 6-19 | 34.4% | 14-21 | 69.8% | 35 | 9 | 13 | 18 | 7 | 13 | 4 | Stats Against (Road Games) | 62.4 | 27.4 | 20-53 | 37.7% | 5-20 | 27.0% | 17-24 | 71.3% | 36 | 10 | 9 | 19 | 6 | 13 | 2 |
|
|
| |
|
|
All Games | 12-8 | +1 | 7-10 | 6-11 | 64.8 | 31.4 | 41.3% | 31.8 | 62.0 | 27.9 | 43.8% | 33.8 | Home Games | 9-4 | +1.8 | 4-7 | 4-7 | 68.3 | 33.4 | 42.3% | 33.1 | 60.8 | 27.2 | 43.0% | 32.3 | Last 5 Games | 3-2 | +1.2 | 3-2 | 1-4 | 57.6 | 25.4 | 37.1% | 32.0 | 60.2 | 30.0 | 42.9% | 35.2 | Conference Games | 5-3 | +2.2 | 5-3 | 3-5 | 60.6 | 27.7 | 38.8% | 31.5 | 61.5 | 29.5 | 42.8% | 35.2 |
|
| |
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 64.8 | 31.4 | 22-54 | 41.3% | 8-23 | 35.4% | 12-16 | 74.5% | 32 | 7 | 12 | 14 | 6 | 10 | 2 | vs opponents surrendering | 66.5 | 31.1 | 23-55 | 41.6% | 7-19 | 34.6% | 14-20 | 70.0% | 34 | 9 | 12 | 18 | 6 | 13 | 3 | Team Stats (Home Games) | 68.3 | 33.4 | 24-56 | 42.3% | 9-24 | 36.3% | 12-16 | 73.6% | 33 | 8 | 13 | 13 | 7 | 9 | 2 | Stats Against (All Games) | 62.0 | 27.9 | 23-52 | 43.8% | 7-19 | 34.5% | 9-14 | 68.3% | 34 | 8 | 12 | 17 | 5 | 13 | 3 | vs opponents averaging | 70.6 | 33.2 | 25-56 | 44.8% | 7-19 | 35.3% | 14-19 | 69.5% | 35 | 9 | 14 | 18 | 7 | 13 | 4 | Stats Against (Home Games) | 60.8 | 27.2 | 22-52 | 43.0% | 7-20 | 36.7% | 9-12 | 74.3% | 32 | 7 | 12 | 17 | 4 | 14 | 2 |
|
| Average power rating of opponents played: NEBRASKA 74.7, MICHIGAN 76.3 |
| | |
|
|
12/10/2014 | INCARNATE WORD | 73-74 | L | | - | | - | 22-52 | 42.3% | 36 | 14 | 25-52 | 48.1% | 26 | 12 | 12/13/2014 | CINCINNATI | 56-55 | W | -5 | L | 122 | U | 16-49 | 32.7% | 42 | 22 | 20-63 | 31.7% | 43 | 18 | 12/22/2014 | @ HAWAII | 58-66 | L | -4 | L | 135 | U | 20-46 | 43.5% | 39 | 18 | 24-64 | 37.5% | 38 | 11 | 12/23/2014 | *LOYOLA-MARYMOUNT | 50-42 | W | -10 | L | 128 | U | 14-38 | 36.8% | 22 | 13 | 14-50 | 28.0% | 40 | 20 | 12/25/2014 | *OHIO U | 71-58 | W | -5 | W | 129 | P | 23-51 | 45.1% | 39 | 12 | 20-53 | 37.7% | 28 | 15 | 12/31/2014 | INDIANA | 65-70 | L | -4 | L | 137 | U | 23-59 | 39.0% | 31 | 8 | 27-60 | 45.0% | 44 | 11 | 1/5/2015 | @ IOWA | 59-70 | L | 9.5 | L | 126 | O | 22-48 | 45.8% | 29 | 10 | 17-44 | 38.6% | 32 | 9 | 1/8/2015 | RUTGERS | 65-49 | W | -10 | W | 117.5 | U | 27-55 | 49.1% | 31 | 9 | 17-49 | 34.7% | 39 | 19 | 1/11/2015 | ILLINOIS | 53-43 | W | -3 | W | 123.5 | U | 21-49 | 42.9% | 38 | 13 | 15-55 | 27.3% | 30 | 9 | 1/15/2015 | @ WISCONSIN | 55-70 | L | 15 | T | 120 | O | 21-50 | 42.0% | 24 | 5 | 21-43 | 48.8% | 27 | 6 | 1/20/2015 | MINNESOTA | 52-49 | W | -2 | W | 129.5 | U | 17-42 | 40.5% | 37 | 15 | 16-52 | 30.8% | 36 | 16 | 1/24/2015 | MICHIGAN ST | 79-77 | W | 2 | W | 119.5 | O | 22-45 | 48.9% | 26 | 10 | 27-66 | 40.9% | 48 | 16 | 1/27/2015 | @ MICHIGAN | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1/31/2015 | @ MINNESOTA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/3/2015 | NORTHWESTERN | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/7/2015 | @ PENN ST | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/10/2015 | WISCONSIN | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/15/2015 | @ PURDUE | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/19/2015 | @ MARYLAND | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
| |
|
|
12/9/2014 | E MICHIGAN | 42-45 | L | -14.5 | L | 128 | U | 14-43 | 32.6% | 27 | 13 | 15-46 | 32.6% | 36 | 17 | 12/13/2014 | @ ARIZONA | 53-80 | L | 10.5 | L | 128 | O | 19-54 | 35.2% | 26 | 12 | 32-55 | 58.2% | 40 | 11 | 12/20/2014 | SMU | 51-62 | L | -1.5 | L | 128.5 | U | 17-54 | 31.5% | 27 | 14 | 23-50 | 46.0% | 44 | 20 | 12/22/2014 | COPPIN ST | 71-56 | W | -26 | L | 148 | U | 25-52 | 48.1% | 43 | 12 | 21-61 | 34.4% | 31 | 11 | 12/30/2014 | ILLINOIS | 73-65 | W | -3 | W | 133.5 | O | 27-66 | 40.9% | 39 | 5 | 24-58 | 41.4% | 36 | 12 | 1/3/2015 | @ PURDUE | 51-62 | L | 3.5 | L | 130.5 | U | 15-47 | 31.9% | 22 | 11 | 21-46 | 45.7% | 44 | 14 | 1/6/2015 | @ PENN ST | 73-64 | W | 1.5 | W | 128 | O | 24-45 | 53.3% | 31 | 15 | 22-53 | 41.5% | 26 | 10 | 1/10/2015 | MINNESOTA | 62-57 | W | -2 | W | 133 | U | 21-52 | 40.4% | 31 | 9 | 19-49 | 38.8% | 37 | 17 | 1/13/2015 | @ OHIO ST | 52-71 | L | 9.5 | L | 129.5 | U | 20-59 | 33.9% | 33 | 13 | 28-57 | 49.1% | 36 | 9 | 1/17/2015 | NORTHWESTERN | 56-54 | W | -9 | L | 121 | U | 20-58 | 34.5% | 29 | 3 | 22-52 | 42.3% | 38 | 12 | 1/20/2015 | @ RUTGERS | 54-50 | W | 2.5 | W | 120 | U | 17-49 | 34.7% | 34 | 11 | 19-52 | 36.5% | 35 | 11 | 1/24/2015 | WISCONSIN | 64-69 | L | 10.5 | W | 120.5 | O | 23-54 | 42.6% | 33 | 9 | 24-51 | 47.1% | 30 | 8 | 1/27/2015 | NEBRASKA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/1/2015 | @ MICHIGAN ST | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/5/2015 | IOWA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/8/2015 | @ INDIANA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/12/2015 | @ ILLINOIS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/17/2015 | MICHIGAN ST | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
| | | NEBRASKA: The Cornhuskers had a tremendous 2013-2014 season, and bring back players capable of making a similar run. SF Terran Petteway (18.1 PPG, 4.8 RPG, 1.6 APG) is one of the top contenders for the Big Ten Player of the Year. He is at his best attacking the rim, and can also be a menace on the defensive end. If he can improve on his shooting from outside (33% threes), he could see his scoring increase even more. Combining Petteway with SF Shavon Shields (12.8 PPG, 5.8 RPG), gives the Cornhuskers one of the best duos in the conference. Shields is a very similar player to Petteway, as he is also very dangerous in the open court. If Nebraska improves from the outside, this team could move up even higher in the conference standings. | | MICHIGAN: No team in the Big Ten lost as many key players as the Wolverines did. These subtractions will force SG Caris LeVert (12.9 PPG, 4.3 RPG, 2.9 APG) to pick up the slack as the go-to scorer. LeVert is an excellent shooter, knocking down 41% threes last season, and he has the ability to get his shot off at any time. While he is a big threat to hit from deep, he can also put the ball on the floor and get to the rim. LeVert will have to score the ball more this season to give the Wolverines a chance to win, and he is capable of becoming an all-conference performer. PG Derrick Walton Jr. (7.9 PPG, 3.0 RPG, 2.9 APG) had his ups and downs as a freshman, but showed that he has a chance to be a star. In a game against rival Michigan State, Walton had 19 points and six rebounds in an upset road victory. The Wolverines could have one of the best backcourts in the country, as sophomore SG Zak Irvin (6.7 PPG, 43% threes) could play a role similar to what LeVert did last season. Michigan will have to get some scoring from the interior if it is going to emerge as a Big Ten contender. |
| | |
| Last Updated: 4/18/2024 2:04:08 AM EST. |
|
|
| |
|