JettFlight5

Cassity on a 7-0 run.

I don't give them the out you do.

05-- Since I said it earlier, I'll give my take on that situation. The AD sold tickets on the premise that the SLU basketball team would have all players. Knowing something was amiss, they continued to sell tickets the same way. Then, two days before the start of practice, the school announces the results of a hearing from an event that happened the previous academic year. At that time, two of the key players are removed from the team (including the players at the center of the marketing push). So those who bought ST this year will get an inferior product to the one that was originally offered. I'm hoping that last sentenece is wrong.

Dayton's only consistency is choking...so you're right, we don't have their history.

I agree with you. SLU proved they were for sale. The season ticket buyers were hit with a bait and switch.

I think that is why the department was kept in the dark. They didn't want the image of a sports vocational school (which many would have stuck with them) because the athletes got special treatment. I agree with the above point that if this was Notre Dame's starting MLB and QB, that hearing never happens. SLU did not want any traces of influence from the athletic department to "contaminate" their process.

Nicely played... I tend to like the conspiracy theories.

Well, with everything that happened, 6th seems to be a pretty good indication that what we have left is still pretty good.

Well said.

Here we go again...let's stack the deck even more against non-BCS schools.

I don't know if you can say that. The moral police may get mad.

I would think that if this was the case, take him anyway and if he's ruled ineligible deal with it later.

Maybe to keep the moral police happy...hey, we threw these two completely out of school. I apologize if I'm a little cynical.

The deceit/theft I was referring to doesn't go to the young woman.

I think I picked 16-14 without KM all year. With him in January....19-11, CBI at best.

Now that we know the ramifications of the incident, are we still picking records?

That is true...I guess anyone who read the original post I made would be offended by my insinuating that there was a degree of deceit/theft involved too.

It's like a train wreck...you want to look away, but you can't.

never mind...frustration boiled over.

Roy, I respect your opinion. I just think that the timing sucked. I had my Billiken Basketball fan hat on instead of my SLU Law Alum hat. Nobody wins here...not the girl, not the team, and not the school.

I think we are severely cursed. I hate to make excuses, but what else can we do? Best team we've had in awhile undercut by the administration.

Have to keep the donors happy.

Other question: How?

Postcard said on: October 14, 2010, 9:55 am Seckert, I'm not sure you know what you're talking about. The two players are in trouble now for the same issue they were "in trouble" for before. The only difference is when this issue first came to light, the police/DA didn't find enough evidence to prosecute. Apparently the Student Court felt there was enough there to suspend them. So before you call anyone stupid, make sure you know what you're talking about. Former SLU board poster, right? Yes, I know this doesn't fit here, but I found it in the Burwell article comments.

I was wondering if it was against the rules to speculate who the donor was. It would have to be somebody with a lot of pull/$$, because tournament money is pretty nice, and SLU knew they would be forfeiting that by taking action.