SouthSide_Billiken

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?

It's so hard to take anything away from these exhibition games. Harris-Stowe hit what seemed like a ton of contested threes which kept the game closer than it should have been. We looked much better in transition than we did in the half-court sets. Although, I also don't know how much you can read into that because we had a very vanilla gameplan and essentially just ran our basic motion set with few (if any) set plays. We also seemed quite disinterested after the great start. Some observations: Goodwin - It seems to me that he will be "the guy" when we need a big bucket. His stroke is so smooth and he has great court vision, particularly in transition. French - He never seemed like he was able to get into a flow on offense (which was partially due to the fact we didn't do a great job of feeding the post), but the guy can rebound. It may take him a few games to really learn how to use his body and physicality without getting called for fouls. I did love the Dikembe finger wag after the block. Foreman - Some Reggie-esque travels. I attribute that to rust. Aggressive rebounder though. Bess - Like with Foreman, there just seemed to be a bit of rust adjusting to game speed. On a few of those forced drives he reminded me of Yacoubou a bit. I was pleasantly surprised to see him hit a few 3's as we've read he worked on that last year. Johnson - I really think he's underrated and will be a key contributor this year. The kid just looks like he loves the game and he looks like he's bulked up some. Here's to hoping we get some clarity on the three guys who weren't at the game. If we are just dealing with some suspensions, I guess it's good news they are counting the exhibition. Either way, there's way more talent on the floor than the last few years.

The Donut Drive-In Apple Fritter is life changing.

Sure sounds that way. If they're working with the University to improve their Sexual Misconduct policies as part of the University's response, it would be reasonable to think that the lawyers have also substantially completed their investigation into Situation 2.0 (or at the very least made enough progress to give the University some idea as to where things are going). That would seemingly make the whole "no news is good news mantra" quite true. Can't wait for tip-off!

These little insights into the scrimmage have me all fired up. The last few years we weren't aggressive or athletic enough to pull in 14 offensive rebounds against a .500 CYC team. To hear we pulled in 14 offensive boards against a legitimate D-1 squad with a 7 footer in the middle (even in a scrimmage) is exciting.

First off, hello. I've been following the board for a while, and have finally decided to jump in. Now, on to the topic at hand. The part of Pestello's letter that stood out to me was the following: "...behavior behind the reports of sexual misconduct..." The statement could have simply said "sexual misconduct" or "allegations of sexual misconduct." They could have even used the term "sexual assault." However, they were seemingly very careful not to do so. To me, this looks like a statement very carefully crafted by lawyers (perhaps even the outside Title IX firm, Cozen O’Connor). I may be way off base, but I took this email as good news. I read it to be the University saying that we aren't going to punish anybody for the alleged September 26 incident. However, we are aware that we have a problem, and don't take sexual assault allegations lightly.