bsheldon

Of course we want the boys to play--we also want the events to not have happened. If you really read the threads you would have seen that almost without exception, everyone said that IF there had been proof of wrong doing--which to this point there is none, we would like for them to be expelled. Also, "rape" was never used anywhere--even by the sensationalistic local news reports that used "sexual assault.

Before the "bad Karma" debacle--yes, I felt that SLU would do better than Richmond this coming season. Gonzalvez was a stud and he is gone. We split with you last year and finished a whole 2 games behind you. We had eveyone that matters back and added some studs. I didn't see any major holes in our team. Hopefully this "Karma," as you called it, doesn't affect that for us. I still think Richmond will be near the top of the league and it will be tough games for the Bills for sure. As for our coach, I don't know of another in the conference I would take over him.

As bad as our LB was--he looked great compared to our RB in the first half. (neither were stellar) a coupleof old soccer guys in the stands next me kept saying, "The wing backs are terrible. They aren't doing anything constructive." He settled down a bit and got better as the game wore on, but the play was on his side of the field for most of time in ther first half and about 75% of the time he touched it--we lost possession. He made one real nice long ball forward, but beyond that, it wasn't good. I was shocked he returned for the second half. He played much better after the break, though.

Westy--brutal CBI comment. Hilarious, but brutal.

Just a few observations about last night's game: KC and CS showed up for a while--they both look fit and ready for the season. This was the first game I have seen of the new coach's regime. I had heard that he likes to play a more attacking style and I was looking forward to watching it. Obviously, I didn't see much of that last night. The back line was almost afraid to make skip passes--they always went man-to-man-to-man slowly accross the field instead of switching sides quickly. I only saw 3 overlaps all game--and all of those came late in the second half. The team really seems young--and it is. There were a few players that immediately stood out and when I looked at what year they were--JR's and SR's. There is a lot of raw talent on the squad and I think they will real good in a year or two. MO ST didn't touch the ball for the first 5 minutes. The only time they really got possession was on just silly plays by our guys. One player in particular seemed to give it away every other time he touched it in the first half. Overall, possession was probably about 60-40 for SLU--it seemed more than that though. On the few occassions they did get the ball in the first half they attacked and created a couple of chances. We didn't get a corner at all in the first half--as we didn't seem to press forward much at all. We really only had one real opportunity and the goalie made a pretty routine save. The second half we attacked a bit more and had a few chances, but never anything stellar. It almost seemed liked we could attack at will, but were just a bit reluctant to do so. Again, we controlled possession, but could never put anything together moving forward. Again, it just seems like some of the guys are just a bit shaky with the ball at times--I am sure they will get more comfortable after a couple of more years. On two chances in particular the player kind of got caught in bewteen shooting and passing and missed everything--badly. In a game with limited opportunites we needed to do better with the few we got. Our sweeper did a fine job on a couple of occastions that really shut down what could have been some premo chances for them. The other thing I noticed was poor service on the set pieces. Especially the corners--it appears to be a set thing as it was repeated over and over--the ball is played real and tight to the goal on the far post. It was almost always high and either the goalie grabbed it or it went over everyone high and curved out of the goal line. The most exciting part of the game was the last 3 minutes when SLU started playing long ball and came real close to a couple of chances. The ref let the fellas play and it was a physical game--several pretty serious collisions and a bunch of jersey grabbing on both sides. Plus a bunch of chippy stuff on set pieces and after the whistle on most plays. I think shots were something like 8 to 4 and our goalie didn't have to make a single save. We ended up with something like 6 corners--all after the first break. Overall, it was an OK experience, not the high scoring goal fest I was hoping for, nor a dramatically different style of play that we saw with our previous coach. I will probably go on the 26th against UMKC. A couple of things about Robert R Hermann field: We went to the far side for the second half just for a change of scenery--the pot-a-johns really need to be moved. They are beyond desperate need to be emptied. The process was repeated several times--fans would walk up to the top of the stands and sit for a few minutes and then have to move down because of the smell--just awful. The highest you could go was about 6 rows up. Also, the sound system on that side needs to be tweaked--the sound from the main side was sitll louder than the speakers on the far side--problem is it take a full second for the sound to reach you. So you hear it from the speakers behind you and then a second later you get it again a bit louder from the front. During any prolonged announcements, it just becomes a jarbled mess. A simple delay adjustment on the far side would make things much better.

You are probably right. I was just in the heat of the moment--someone ssaid they committee should see some of these ideas. That was my thought to make sure they did--kind of toungue in cheek.

I understand that--but I don't think they will be kicked off campus and suspended for a whole season just for going to a party and having a few drinks at the end of the school year well after the season. They will be punished for sure--and rightly so, but not kicked off of the team for whole season. Maybe a few games, some community service, counseling, etc.

That is why I am saying turn the thing on its head--say you were drinking and therefore couldn't possibly of consented either. So, by rule she committed just as much of a sexual assault on you as you did to her. SLU is supposed to be an open and diverse learning institution--heck they just put up a bunch of flags advertising how diverse they are--now lets truly be diverse and drop the sexism that is implied and built into the rule. If you truly follow it to the letter: If a man is drunk than he could not give consent either.

Not in general obviously, as we live in the real world. But SLU's code of conduct rules don't live there. According to their rules--your statement is correct as far as sexual consent is concerned. There is no possibility of consent if there is drinking involved. Even if a gal strips down to nothing, rubs her funbags in your face, goes downtown on you while you are passed out and then you wake up half way through--if you continue or not is irrelevant. She can later say she regrets what happened and charge you with sexual assualt or rape because she did not (could not by the rule) give consent because she had had a few drinks. Now I say to turn the thing around and say that you obviously couldn't of given consent either as you were drunk and therefore she assaulted you--as you now regret what happened.

Thanks. I'll testify. Hell I made that stuff up in a few minutes, just imagine what I could do with a couple of days. 05 and any other of you young bucks that are in school now--get all of these threads in front of as many people on campus a humanly possible--now. Make it happen. I know you "Blue Crew" or soon to be "Slunatics" are a motivated bunch--get on it. Blast out emails to the whole campus, print them out, post them on everyone of the zillion bulliten boards, etc. Put down the X-Box remotes and the bongs and get to work--you have a basketball season and 2 players careers and lives to save. You will be heros.

My biggest issues with this whole mess are: The delay in the ruling--it hsould havebeen handled months ago. This was high profile enough for a "special" session or wahtever. Whoever did not make this happen should be fired--ultimately FR B should have stepped in and made it happen. The "rule" they are using to punish these kids with. Let's just say they admit they were drunk? Then they, by rule, were incapable themselve to give consent for "sexual activity." Really they should turn this thing on its head. They had drinks, therefore, it was sexual assault against them because in retrospect they regret doing it and they would not have gone through with it had they been sober. So, again, by the rule, they were the victims of sexual assault. If they are going to follow this mickey mouse rule--follow it to the end of its logical conclusions. Use the rule as it is written for your own defense. This is all just awful for the program. Hopefully, they get some sort of community service and perhaps some suspension. Ruining these young men's lives does not seem appropriate for a drunken hook up or at worse "sexual assault" with no real evidence.

Hilarious.

This person needs to be found and well.. I was going to say beat into a bloody gooey mess, but that didn't sound right. I am sure someone can think of something more appropriate.

My problem with the whole thing is the whole "consent can not be givien if intoxication is involved." This simply means that anytime that any person regrets doing something with someone they can claim "sexual assault" or even "rape." Obviously, I don't really know what happened that night, but hypothetically: She could have instigated the entire thing. Then the next day or several days later her daddy could have pressed her as to where she was that night and what exactly did she do and she could have said anything. Simply saying she had any kind of sexual contact under the influence automatically implicates the other parties and puts them under charges because she (the underage drunk who decides she regretted her own actions at a later date) was under the influence. By the letter of the rule, they are guilty just because she says they had sexual contact of any kind--if in fact they did. Even simply kissing could be enough. It doesn't matter who started it or how willing all parties were in the alleged events. If there was any contact of any kind and she had one drink at all--they are guilty by the rule. So according to this rule a young man, 18-22 year old, who is approached by a similarly aged young lady that is being aggressive and is wanting to have sex with him is supposed to what--ask for a blood alcohol test first before even kissing her? Again, I am not saying that she was the instigator in the real scenario, but just pointing out the impracticality of the rule. Anyone who has ever had sex after a single beer was consumed by either party while a student at SLU is in violation of the rule and could be expelled. Sure, underage drinking is bad--but the rule still applies if your are 22 or 23--have a drink and it can be sexual assault or rape--even if the other party was totally the instigator at the time but later decides they are not happy with their own actions. IF all of this turns out to be true it will truly be a sad day for the Billikens. I was so excited about this season--as were many. To lose those two would be a devestating blow to the team and this program's upward path.

L-R: No, Maybe after 12 pack, ", ", ", ", No, No, No, No F'in way, ", ", ", " After a second look, I might have to throw in several shots as well. I am sure they are all nice young ladies and this picture was just taking in bad light with an unfortunate costume choice and then you have to remember that the camera adds 10 (or so) pounds. Oh, who am I kidding, back in my college days--I did worse. Booze is a bad thing.

Gman, I totally missed what you said. Sorry for the confusion--major brain fart on my part. I saw "lindy" and assumed you meant Lindenwood. I had thought that that was where DY went--I knew it was local and got it confused. I think he is actually at Maryville. I did not know that Lindy's was an online sports magazine/service. If that is what they said about SLU than I think Bonzo the monkey could have done better. It is safe to say you didn't join--for good reason.

thanks. He is probably not playing until conference time then--at least.

Good to see a win. Hopefully they can put a few together. Also nice to hear that over 5,000 people showed up. Myabe, just maybe there is some enthusiasm for the Billikens right now and that Fetz will be packed come basketball season. I am going to try to go to tomorrow night's game. I usually try to go to one or two a year. Any news on Mike Roach? Is he healthy?

GMan, It sounds like you don't think DY will contribute much? Why? Sure, he probably isn't going to go for 20 a night, but he could be a solid contributor at that level. I guess it depends on your definition of "big contributor."

Sure, IF and it is a HUGE IF, the andy Dickland story is remotely true, and from the VERY limited info I have gathered with my expert thread reading skills, and the worst case scenario happens--we lose WR, that obviously will be a big hit for this basketball team. 25 wins will be real, real tough without him. Last year he was a force down low in many games--we are expecting at least the same this year. CR came a long way, and if BC stays healthy--it can still be done--especially if RL is half as good as advertised. Again though, Dickland has been blatantly wrong before, and from what I read, this report seems to be a bit shaky in its origins.

I think local talent's value is being overstated a bit. Sure there would be a slight increase in interest in the program just by getting the kid's family, friends and people and who went to school with him to a game or two, but the bottom line is--you still have to win games. Period. Duke didn't win the national championship last year with a bunch of homegrown talent--they went out and recruited a team--just like everyone else. When (within the next couple of years) SLU is an established winning program--we will garner the attention of more good players--no matter where they are from. Winning will do that. Now, if we continue to win for several years in a row, there might actually be some buzz about the program within the city and some younger, local guys may start to follow the program and truly want to go to SLU--just like any other program. Some kids want to go their local program and others want to get away. I don't see any higher relationship between locals and out-of town kids at most top programs. If there is--it isn't substantial. I don't see many kids from Lexington on KY's team. Again, when we were a fledgling program--getting any help with local exposure or talent was a bonus. However, once established as a winning program--it really won't matter. I also feel that just because a kid is local and some people actually get to see him play he is considered more of a prize. Say a 4* local vs a 4* kid from Timbuktu--the local kid is perceived to be a better get and is wanted more--I guess because of the personal attachment? RM knows what he wants in players and I don't think where the kid was born really plays into his decision much. Would I have loved to see BEAL in Billiken white and blue? Of course, just as would a fan from any top program--talent like that is prized by everyone, not just schools local to the kid. I would also have loved to see Brandon Knight in St. Louis too, but again that didn't happen. Truly top tier talent like that is going to have his pick of schools and quite frankly, I don't know why a kid would pick SLU over any number of top programs that have better facilities, more exposure, a consistent record of winning, etc. Again establishing a winning tradition will change that and SLU will see its fair share of 4*'s and maybe a 5 here or there in the next 10 years. Will any of those be local? Who knows? How many 5*'s does St Louis produce a year--maybe 1 sometimes 2? 4 stars--5-10? Again in the scheme of things this is a very small poplutaion of players--many of whom may not be a fit for SLU for any number of reasons (team make up, acedemics, etc.) So, with literally hundreds of players to build your team with, focussing on this tiny bunch may not make the most sense. Yes, they are close and it would be much easier to stay in touch with the kid, but again, very few of these kids may even be a fit, and even fewer may even want to stay home.

Ok, I get that this Dickland guy is a bum, but does anyone know specifics that he has claimed in the past that turned out to be nothing? I am not a regular listener of KFNS.

Love it.

Doc, I too have looked at the schedule and analyzed most of the match ups with most of the teams. There are definitely some tough games there and many games that there definitely is a very realistic chance that we lose. However, if we truly want to make the next step and be a regular tournament team--those are the games we must win. Beating up on a bunch of 200+ rpi teams at home really doesn't help us get to the next level. This year's schedule is full of teams that finished near the top of their conferences last year. IUPUI, Portland, Jacksonville, Northeastern, Southern Miss, and E TN all were within a game or two of winning their conferences last year--and many have most of their players returning. This doesn't take into consideration the monster games @ Duke and a totally improved GA coming to our house. Sure, can we lose 7 or even 8 games before conference? Yes, but that is the point--we are now playing a better caliber of opposition. However, these are the type of games we have to win if we are going to get invited to the dance. 25 wins should be the realistic, yet high achieving regular season goal of this team heading into the season. I picked 22-8 in the "first official prediction" thread a week or so ago.

Excellent post. I am expecting big things from the freshman. However, the difference with this year's class and the last couple is that this year's class won't have to carry a huge load--we actually have returning players to do that. This year's freshan class is kind of just gravy. Any production from thatm at all is icing on the cake. Now if they truly step up and not just contribute but their play demands playing time--then we will be a very good team and we should go far this season. I am excited about this season and can't wait for it to get started. Go Bills.