Jump to content

Fall 2017 allegations against unnamed players (aka Situation 2)


DoctorB

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

10 minutes ago, 615Billiken said:

The fact that the three players didn't suit up tells us one thing: its worse than we thought, but not as bad as it could be.

If there is bad news it’s that we don’t know what the resolution for the 3 will be. If there was a resolution we would know by now. Obviously the process is ongoing. Being an optomist the fact that they are still in school and practicing gives me hope. I,m not sure anyone knows how this is going to play out. Anyone who claims to know is lying. I hope it’s over soon but I wouldn’t bet on it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those looking for some optimism regarding Situation 2.0, the official game preview dated November 4 (http://www.slubillikens.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=27200&ATCLID=211676759) references our transfers, "5 of whom will be eligible this year." I'd really hope that if they anticipated some long-term issues that they wouldn't be marketing these guys.

Has anybody heard any rumors as to whether tonight's absences were expected or a last minute surprise?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, gobillsgo said:

If this was a last minute suspension handed down by the higher ups, that's pretty ridiculous. They've had plenty of time to decide on any punitive action, if they just sprung this on Ford today that's terrible. 

I agree completely that it's ridiculous if last minute. I'd like to think SLU would handle things better than that, so I'm hoping this was all part of the plan. And if so, then the fact that they're still practicing as if they are part of the rotation hopefully indicates that it's just a short absence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, gobillsgo said:

If this was a last minute suspension handed down by the higher ups, that's pretty ridiculous. They've had plenty of time to decide on any punitive action, if they just sprung this on Ford today that's terrible. 

I don't think there is any chance this was last minute.

They are going through the Title IX process. The decision has been made that until the process is finalized, they aren't playing. Key part of Stu's article today was this:

The internal investigation is supposed to take no more than 60 days, a mark that would come approximately after the first five games.

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/college/slu/minus-three-players-billikens-outlast-harris-stowe/article_40da0eb7-e8bc-55a0-901d-66a42bdd3d7e.html

At this point, people should be prepared for them to miss the first 5 games minimum. After that, it's anyone's guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess once a walk on always a walk on according to lots of MBM's on this board. Hines did a good job last night.

He did not cause any drop off when he played. He is a scholarship player.

JMHO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, drkelsey55 said:

I guess once a walk on always a walk on according to lots of MBM's on this board. Hines did a good job last night.

He did not cause any drop off when he played. He is a scholarship player.

JMHO

We were up by 15 when hines came into the game the first time.   Within 5 minutes the lead was cut to 5.   Hines is a tremendous drop off from our starters.   He would be a nice starter for Harris stowe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, drkelsey55 said:

I guess once a walk on always a walk on according to lots of MBM's on this board. Hines did a good job last night.

He did not cause any drop off when he played. He is a scholarship player.

JMHO

He was one of two players with a negative +/-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

We were up by 15 when hines came into the game the first time.   Within 5 minutes the lead was cut to 5.   Hines is a tremendous drop off from our starters.   He would be a nice starter for Harris stowe

I guess the other four players had not affect either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree with Roy here. Hines is easily the best ball-handler among our currently eligible players, but he was getting torched defensively and his penetration often just gets him in trouble among the trees. 

Goodwin, Roby, and Bess are all capable of bringing up the ball against pressure without turning it over, but they exert a lot of energy in the effort and it doesn't set the offense well or punish the defense for pressing. We ultimately need Bishop or Graves for that purpose. Not having Adonys really creates a gap in our offensive options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, davidnark said:

I have to agree with Roy here. Hines is easily the best ball-handler among our currently eligible players, but he was getting torched defensively and his penetration often just gets him in trouble among the trees. 

Goodwin, Roby, and Bess are all capable of bringing up the ball against pressure without turning it over, but they exert a lot of energy in the effort and it doesn't set the offense well or punish the defense for pressing. We ultimately need Bishop or Graves for that purpose. Not having Adonys really creates a gap in our offensive options.

I agree with this. Goodwin as good as he is is not a natural point. As Nark said it takes too much time and energy to start the offense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • davidnark changed the title to Fall 2017 allegations against unnamed players (aka Situation 2)
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...