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

5 minutes ago, gobillsgo said:

Right, only difference I can tell is that they were included in a team photo. 

Yes-and up to this point the university's official basketball account has been very careful to NOT show the three players in photos. 

Does it prove anything? No...

But it's all we've got.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Pistol said:

 

I've been doing a little reasearch on this tonight and redshirt players actually are allowed to travel. Source: https://healthfully.com/college-basketball-redshirting-rules-6716421.html

Redshirted athletes are allowed to travel, practice and even dress for competition for their team during their redshirt season, but the minute they step on the playing field, they lose their redshirt status and use a season of eligibility.

I think this might be the reason for the confusion. This rule applies to transfers:

Academic year in residence: Under the basic transfer regulations, you must spend an academic year in residence at the school to which you are transferring. If you transfer from a four-year college to an NCAA school, you must complete one academic year in residence at the new school before you can play for or receive travel expenses from the new school, unless you qualify for a transfer exception or waiver. To satisfy an academic year in residence, you must be enrolled in and successfully complete a full-time program of studies for two-full semesters or three-full quarters. Summer school terms and part-time enrollment do not count toward fulfilling an academic year in residence.

So it's not that they aren't allowed to travel, it's that they can't have their travel paid for until they've been there a year, functionally making transfers non-travel players. Graves didn't travel during the first semester because he hadn't completed one year in residence yet. Now he can travel with them. Henriquez has already completed an entire year at SLU, so he could travel all season long. The rule never applied to Bishop, because he never transferred. Keen eyes will notice that it's actually not a full team photo because Santos isn't there; this is his year in residence. This rule only applies to transfers and not freshmen taking a redshirt or medical redshirts.

In short, traveling on this trip has no impact on the status of Graves or Henriquez. We still don't know if they'll play this season, and they haven't jeopardized anything because of it.

I got the exhibition game eligibility rule confused with the travel rule. Only first year freshman redshirts can play in exhibition games.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, gobillsgo said:

Right, only difference I can tell is that they were included in a team photo. 

That but I would say SLU hasn't shown them in team photos when on any trip even though we know they went.  We also know now that the investigation is complete and the final report has been in SLU's hands at least since the 28th of December but probably before that.  Now they show up in a picture that includes the athletic director.  It didn't make sense why they couldn't play when the investigation was ongoing but probably a CYA move.  It would be incredibly dumb of SLU to then show them with the team traveling when they have a report that said they did something wrong.  

So to me it's the combination of knowing the report is complete and now they show up in a picture.  Doesn't mean they are for sure playing Saturday but makes me feel a resolution is close.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, 615Billiken said:

Yes-and up to this point the university's official basketball account has been very careful to NOT show the three players in photos. 

Does it prove anything? No...

But it's all we've got.

Ok fair point. I’m hopeful that they’re cleared. I’ll really believe it once they’re on the floor for warm ups. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AnkielBreakers said:

This thread is ridiculous, and shows little knowledge of the school and it’s history.  I think it can reasonably be assured that the investigation will wrap up and the students will be cleared to play on February 30th.  All three players will play after that date, and SLU will lose in the first round of the A-10 tourney. To paraphrase Einstein, expecting a different outcome would be to court insanity.

I thought there were 31 days in February

AnkielBreakers likes this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Macallan 18 said:

Not sure why we think there will be an announcement?  There does not need to be.  The boys play and when reporters ask Ford and/or May about it they reply “we are not allowed to comment.  Next question? 

I agree. Images and info of the three in an official university social channel means they’ve got to be playing...

David King likes this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, 3Bill said:

I've also heard through the legal community is that she was an honest and unbiased prosecutor.  So the anger toward her is displaced.   Particularly since she apparently just had a baby in mid-November. And if she was and is out (not sure if she's still out but probably) on maternity leave, then she shouldn't be personally blamed for this mess.

My guess is that her department is understaffed and underpaid and, with her gone, things might not be getting done as timely as they should.


Blame the administration, not someone who's got an 8 week old baby and would have been 9 months pregnant when this all blew up.

 

Board.  Correct me but wasn't September 27th the date of S2?  Middle of November is long after the 3 were suspended from games.  And Middle of November was long after the hearing officer was already appointed and actively handling the case - not Kratky.  Middle of the November, Kratky has her baby and may still be on maternity leave but women in her condition can still talk on the phone to her office and Dr. P - a month after her baby is born - when the case was put into the hands of SLU, especially when S2 and the events/hearing officer is probably the biggest case to have gone through her office.  

Again, who suspended the 3 boys? and why?  I have to believe the suspension was by Dr. P based upon Kratky's recommendation and that the boys/Rosenblum were OK with this as well based -- see prior comments about "self imposed" punishment based upon perceived/expressed timeline of events (60 days and only pre-conference season affected).

Sorry, 3Bill, not buying whatever you are selling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Macallan 18 said:

Not sure why we think there will be an announcement?  There does not need to be.  The boys play and when reporters ask Ford and/or May about it they reply “we are not allowed to comment.  Next question? 

They could have done this after the 3rd game. If they waited this long, we can assume the investigation is complete, and in that case, why would they not be allowed to comment? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AnkielBreakers said:

This thread is ridiculous, and shows little knowledge of the school and it’s history.  I think it can reasonably be assured that the investigation will wrap up and the students will be cleared to play on February 30th.  All three players will play after that date, and SLU will lose in the first round of the A-10 tourney. To paraphrase Einstein, expecting a different outcome would be to court insanity.

February 30

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
February 30 is usually used as a sarcastic date for referring to something that will never happen or will never be done.
 
 
Hmmm.....So you are saying it doesn't look good??
 
 
 
AnkielBreakers likes this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, 615Billiken said:

just give me an above .500 conference record and 2 wins in the A10 tournament and I will consider it a ‘good’ season.

I know you put ‘good’ in quotes but... no. Win the A-10 tournament or bust. If we impress the rest of the way, or come up just short in the tournament, it will prove what a complete torpedo job this has been. Gonna be real hard to pull this season out of the ‘disaster’ category

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we get the three back on Saturday, I think there is a good chance we will only lose 2 more games before the A10 tournament. That would put us at 13-5, and if you count the other 2 games we should've won it would be 15-3. 

13-5 should be enough for a double bye. 

In the A10 tourney, get the 3 seed, beat #2 Bona, then #1 Rhody Andy make the NCAAT

then win a game or two there

 

-ONLY way the investigation will be worth it because they could have fresh legs 

 

David King and Spoon-Balls like this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jimbofive said:

I seriously don't want any of them to play. We could win every remaining game by 50, lose in the A-10 championship game by 1, and still get stiffed for the NCAA tourney.  Just not worth it if we can get an extra full year from any of them.  Especially Graves.

If I were a player or the father of a player, I would definitely want to preserve as much eligibility as possible.  At the same time, guys may play more the rest of this season than they would 1, 2 or 3 years from now ifThatch, Pearson, etc. are able to join Goodwin.   And without using specific names (and not intending references to any of our 3 suspended player but instead talking generally) the basketball program is better off to not redshirt.  Play guys now, win games now, and then recruit as good or better players in the future.  Redshirt guys who are injured or need an extra year of development/size/strength.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Clock_Tower said:

Board.  Correct me but wasn't September 27th the date of S2?  Middle of November is long after the 3 were suspended from games.  And Middle of November was long after the hearing officer was already appointed and actively handling the case - not Kratky.  Middle of the November, Kratky has her baby and may still be on maternity leave but women in her condition can still talk on the phone to her office and Dr. P - a month after her baby is born - when the case was put into the hands of SLU, especially when S2 and the events/hearing officer is probably the biggest case to have gone through her office.  

Again, who suspended the 3 boys? and why?  I have to believe the suspension was by Dr. P based upon Kratky's recommendation and that the boys/Rosenblum were OK with this as well based -- see prior comments about "self imposed" punishment based upon perceived/expressed timeline of events (60 days and only pre-conference season affected).

Sorry, 3Bill, not buying whatever you are selling.

I’m not selling anything buddy.  Just find it a bit ludicrus for a bunch of people whose “inside information” comes from Adonis henriguez’s twitter feed to be speculating about the worth ethic and ability of one person in the legal department, who I don’t know myself.

 

I basically come to this board for entertainment to read the latest gossip about the bills.  Like my wife reading people magazine.  I find that very few, if any, people on this board have a clue.   Instead you all work yourself up all day long wondering what might be happening and resorting to crazy speculation.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...