Fall 2017 allegations against unnamed players (aka Situation 2)

[cheeseman]

31 minutes ago, kappy96 said:

I don't understand how this could slow the process?  To date, the outside firm conducted their investigation and turned  their findings over to SLU about 3 weeks ago at which point both sides had the opportunity to review and respond (at least that is my understanding).  I suppose her laywer may not have liked what the investigation uncovered and could have responded in a way that SLU is now treading even more carefully in an effort to avoid looking even worse?  Just trying to piece together a potential scenario here.  Regardless, Freddie's response that they're following the process but failing to disclose what the process is makes it even more clear there likely isn't a process at all now that it is in their hands.

I think your thought is one of a likely possibility.

[Clock_Tower]

15 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

Not if they transfer to a non D1 school.  Plenty of players from D2 naia play for pay after they graduate.  The scouts will find them if  they are good enough.

  If I was the 3 of them that's what I'd do.  Well that and Rev up the lawsuit against SLU and the 2 girls who brought false accusations  against them.  

I don't like I'm advocating a lawsuit against my Alma mater but this whole thing has been so unfair.  The players deserve everything they can get.

The fact the players were never arrested or charged speaks volumes.

Make a decision 

Read my prior my posts and you and you will see that I am not a fan of Title IX being used to create Ms Kratkys’ office and that rules which say that tipsy girls cannot consent but also believe that all of this is unconstitutional. I blame SLU for enacting such policies and don’t believe scholarship athletes should be punished/suspended while they await their fate. Again, if they broke the law, expel them, don’t let them practice and go to school. 

I don’t want my son to “ be a Billiken” if this is how they treat male students generally. In my opinion, SLU doesn’t deserve a dime of my money bc of their anti-male policies. Shame on SLU and Fr Biondi and Dr P for not learning anything from Situation 1. 

If Dr P doesn’t follow this “process” (even though anti-male) then SLU’s exposure to the angry, justice seeking girl(s) is way more than that of 3 basketball players who probably did break some student code of conduct rules  

Because SLU and Dr Fred are stuck w this “process” I have no real problems with the way that it is being carried out. 2 months v 3 months is not major. What I believe everyone is missing is the precedent for the severity of the punishments  appears to be 1 year or more and not the 2 games, 5 games, 1 semester that most of us feel is more appropriate and even possibly excessive. Show me any percedent that our 3 have suffered enough or are being treated worse or differently that non scholarship male students. 

[cheeseman]

2 minutes ago, Clock_Tower said:

Read my prior my posts and you and you will see that I am not a fan of Title IX being used to create Ms Kratkys’ office and that rules which say that tipsy girls cannot consent but also believe that all of this is unconstitutional. I blame SLU for enacting such policies and don’t believe scholarship athletes should be punished/suspended while they await their fate. Again, if they broke the law, expel them, don’t let them practice and go to school. 

I don’t want my son to “ be a Billiken” if this is how they treat male students generally. In my opinion, SLU doesn’t deserve a dime of my money bc of their anti-male policies. Shame on SLU and Fr Biondi and Dr P for not learning anything from Situation 1. 

If Dr P doesn’t follow this “process” (even though anti-male) then SLU’s exposure to the angry, justice seeking girl(s) is way more than that of 3 basketball players who probably did break some student code of conduct rules  

Because SLU and Dr Fred are stuck w this “process” I have no real problems with the way that it is being carried out. 2 months v 3 months is not major. What I believe everyone is missing is the precedent for the severity of the punishments  appears to be 1 year or more and not the 2 games, 5 games, 1 semester that most of us feel is more appropriate and even possibly excessive. Show me any percedent that our 3 have suffered enough or are being treated worse or differently that non scholarship male students. 

The only thing to keep in mind is that SLU has lost some cases and had to overturn these harsher penalties.  This might make them think twice.

[Bills_06]

25 minutes ago, slufan13 said:

 

 

Just awful.  If I have work to do and the office is closed, I still have to finish it to meet deadlines.  There is no reason they shouldn't have worked for 12 hour days this week to get it done.  Just awful by SLU leadership.  

[BigMouthBilliken]

3 minutes ago, Bills_06 said:

Just awful.  If I have work to do and the office is closed, I still have to finish it to meet deadlines.  There is no reason they shouldn't have worked for 12 hour days this week to get it done.  Just awful by SLU leadership.  

I expect nothing less than weak, politically correct social justice warrior leadership out of Pestello and the slu administration. 

[Clock_Tower]

11 minutes ago, Bills_06 said:

Just awful.  If I have work to do and the office is closed, I still have to finish it to meet deadlines.  There is no reason they shouldn't have worked for 12 hour days this week to get it done.  Just awful by SLU leadership.  

Not sure SLU can require this -- 12 hour days and final result by December 22nd.  At some point, "leadership" become "impartial involvement".  And we also want a favorable result.  Making demands could push the opposite way.

[Clock_Tower]

18 minutes ago, cheeseman said:

The only thing to keep in mind is that SLU has lost some cases and had to overturn these harsher penalties.  This might make them think twice.

Which is where we need the Hearing Officer to say 2 semesters in response to the 3 boys' demand for no punishment and the 1/3 girls' demand for expulsion/never play again.  Then, Dr. Fred can say, in light of the recent reversals, the pressures from both sides, that he believes 1 semester is fair and then let them return.  Patience at this point with Dr. Fred is our only hope.  There is a reason that our 3 boys have not seen filed suit, have not leaked the names of the girls, etc.

[Bills_06]

11 minutes ago, Clock_Tower said:

Not sure SLU can require this -- 12 hour days and final result by December 22nd.  At some point, "leadership" become "impartial involvement".  And we also want a favorable result.  Making demands could push the opposite way.

Not saying they require an exact amount of time to work but to say to wrap it up before break or keep working.  And I just want a result.  If the kids are back and representing the University next week, it doesn't make any sense to me that a few of them can't play because the hearing officer is sitting at home drinking coffee and watching TV.  They either shouldn't have suspended the kids pending the result or they should keep working during breaks until it is solved.  

[cheeseman]

22 minutes ago, Clock_Tower said:

Which is where we need the Hearing Officer to say 2 semesters in response to the 3 boys' demand for no punishment and the 1/3 girls' demand for expulsion/never play again.  Then, Dr. Fred can say, in light of the recent reversals, the pressures from both sides, that he believes 1 semester is fair and then let them return.  Patience at this point with Dr. Fred is our only hope.  There is a reason that our 3 boys have not seen filed suit, have not leaked the names of the girls, etc.

Fair points - I wonder if Chafetz is putting a bug in Fred's head?

[dlarry]

37 minutes ago, Bills_06 said:

Just awful.  If I have work to do and the office is closed, I still have to finish it to meet deadlines.  There is no reason they shouldn't have worked for 12 hour days this week to get it done.  Just awful by SLU leadership.  

I had a boss that worked 8-5 every day. He would never come in on a weekend or work late. It didn't matter if we had stuff that needed to get done. 5 PM roled around and he was out. You know what happened to him? 

He was fired and replaced by a guy who puts in the hours needed to finish the job.

When you have a big boy job sometime you have to put in extra time and make difficult decisions. I would have thought this would have been one of those times. If the people running this s*** show aren't willing to put in the time they need to be replaced with people who are.

[kappy96]

10 minutes ago, Bills_06 said:

Not saying they require an exact amount of time to work but to say to wrap it up before break or keep working.  And I just want a result.  If the kids are back and representing the University next week, it doesn't make any sense to me that a few of them can't play because the hearing officer is sitting at home drinking coffee and watching TV.  They either shouldn't have suspended the kids pending the result or they should keep working during breaks until it is solved.  

Exactly.  SLU's actions to date have been a de-facto punishment to the 3 players but they refuse to acknowledge it for what it is while they hide behind "staying true to the process". 

It's as if they're playing a game of poker with the lives of these men and women and just keep folding their hand when the action is on them. 

[cheeseman]

1 minute ago, dlarry said:

I had a boss that worked 8-5 every day. He would never come in on a weekend or work late. It didn't matter if we had stuff that needed to get done. 5 PM roled around and he was out. You know what happened to him? 

He was fired and replaced by a guy who puts in the hours needed to finish the job.

When you have a big boy job sometime you have to put in extra time and make difficult decisions. I would have thought this would have been one of those times. If the people running this s*** show aren't willing to put in the time they need to be replaced with people who are.

Pushing the hearing officer to make a decision before they are ready may backfire as Clock pointed out.  I am not sure what the problem is but actually no news could be good news in this case.  If they were going drop the hammer then why wait.

[kappy96]

2 minutes ago, dlarry said:

I had a boss that worked 8-5 every day. He would never come in on a weekend or work late. It didn't matter if we had stuff that needed to get done. 5 PM roled around and he was out. You know what happened to him? 

Let me guess...he took the job as President of SLU?

[cheeseman]

Just now, kappy96 said:

Let me guess...he took the job as President of SLU?

No President of the USA

[DeSmetBilliken]

4 minutes ago, cheeseman said:

I am not sure what the problem is but actually no news could be good news in this case.  If they were going drop the hammer then why wait.

I agree. I’ve thought for a while that if the evidence really showed that these guys were guilty of something serious, not only would they have likely been facing criminal charges, but this SLU disciplinary action would have been swift. I keep going back to the fact that the players are traveling and practicing with the team. I have a hard time believing that SLU would be allowing them to travel if they that these guys could be guilty of serious wrongdoing.

[dlarry]

12 minutes ago, kappy96 said:

Let me guess...he took the job as President of SLU?

No he went to the DMV where being slow and inefficient is celebrated. 

[Clock_Tower]

44 minutes ago, Bills_06 said:

Not saying they require an exact amount of time to work but to say to wrap it up before break or keep working.  And I just want a result.  If the kids are back and representing the University next week, it doesn't make any sense to me that a few of them can't play because the hearing officer is sitting at home drinking coffee and watching TV.  They either shouldn't have suspended the kids pending the result or they should keep working during breaks until it is solved.  

Walk us through your idea of "leadership."  What should Dr. Fred say to the Hearing Officer.

As to sitting home drinking coffee, I suggest that this entire Title IX investigation by the outside group/law firm is, in essence, "an appeal" or what the law calls a "trial de novo" or new trial in that I have to believe that 3 girls complained against 4 players, Ms. Kratsky's office investigated as did the St. Louis Police Department, Ms. Kratky's office made an initial finding that the boys should be suspended, that the 4 boys appealed to Ms. Kratky's office, that 1 of the 4 boys was cleared and that either her decision or Dr. Fred's decision was to handle this matter differently and hire an outside group.  If so, then the decision was to let Ms. Kratky's initial determination stand until resolution by the outside group/law firm/Hearing Officer.  If I am correct, then, what would be the basis be for Dr. P to change this decision and let the boys play?  That no matter what the Hearing Officer says, the boys have suffered enough and that the basketball team cannot be shorthanded anymore?

Don't get me wrong, Dr. P and SLU created this mess by adopting these anti-male policies, by establishing Ms. Kratky's office and allowing them to do what they did and are doing despite Situation 1 and then outsourced the same for Situation 2.   Not much Dr. P can do at this point. 

[almaman]

1 hour ago, BigMouthBilliken said:

I expect nothing less than weak, politically correct social justice warrior leadership out of Pestello and the slu administration. 

Would you like fries with that ?

[Spoon-Balls]

1 hour ago, slufan13 said:

 

 

[brianstl]

3 hours ago, JMM28 said:

No if Graves transferred he would have to sit another full year which is why you haven’t seen him or Henriquez transfer yet. 

Graves is the one guy that can afford to let this play all the way out.  He can sit the whole season and lose no eligibility.  If SLU would end up expelling him, the NCAA would likely grant him immediate eligibility next season at his next stop.  That won’t happen if he transfers at the semester. So for Graves it makes sense for him to force SLU to make a determination.

[Billfan7]

1 hour ago, cheeseman said:

Fair points - I wonder if Chafetz is putting a bug in Fred's head?

The board's social media gurus should be reaching out to both Richard & Ross Chaifetz and maybe Joseph Conran, as well, to tell them that Fred needs to act and how his inaction is being perceived by the SLU community.  These folks are in essence Fred's boss after all. 

Also, why is a producer at 590 the only media member who seems to have spoken to and/or is getting info from Rosenblum's firm?   

[DeSmetBilliken]

6 minutes ago, Billfan7 said:

 

Also, why is a producer at 590 the only media member who seems to have spoken to and/or is getting info from Rosenblum's firm?   

He probably has a connection to someone on that side of the situation. With that said, it needs to go beyond Gardner tweeting to a couple thousand followers.

[VeniceMenace]

4 hours ago, CBFan said:

If SLU is handling S2  poorly why haven't the players transferred?

I really thought the 3 would announce they were transferring and then sue SLU.

Could it be coach Ford keeping this team together, not any good options out there, a second transfer for two of them?

If they’re out for the season due to this is it possible the gain another year of eligibility since they have not played a game this year? 

[Bills_06]

2 hours ago, Clock_Tower said:

Walk us through your idea of "leadership."  What should Dr. Fred say to the Hearing Officer.

As to sitting home drinking coffee, I suggest that this entire Title IX investigation by the outside group/law firm is, in essence, "an appeal" or what the law calls a "trial de novo" or new trial in that I have to believe that 3 girls complained against 4 players, Ms. Kratsky's office investigated as did the St. Louis Police Department, Ms. Kratky's office made an initial finding that the boys should be suspended, that the 4 boys appealed to Ms. Kratky's office, that 1 of the 4 boys was cleared and that either her decision or Dr. Fred's decision was to handle this matter differently and hire an outside group.  If so, then the decision was to let Ms. Kratky's initial determination stand until resolution by the outside group/law firm/Hearing Officer.  If I am correct, then, what would be the basis be for Dr. P to change this decision and let the boys play?  That no matter what the Hearing Officer says, the boys have suffered enough and that the basketball team cannot be shorthanded anymore?

Don't get me wrong, Dr. P and SLU created this mess by adopting these anti-male policies, by establishing Ms. Kratky's office and allowing them to do what they did and are doing despite Situation 1 and then outsourced the same for Situation 2.   Not much Dr. P can do at this point. 

I would say one item of leadership is to set deadlines on items that need to be completed.  Based on the average length of a Title IX investigation the Wiz posted and the timeline, setting it at 3 months and right before Christmas would make a great deadline.  Then he pushes everybody, from the firm doing the investigation to the hearing officer to make sure it gets done on time and gets done properly.  When Steve Jobs was coming up with the iPhone, he found a company that made the gorilla glass he wanted to use.  They hadn't made it in years because there was no market for it after they developed it and told him there was no chance to make the amount he wanted done in the 6 months he wanted it.  He said yes it was and was able to get them to finish it.  There are tons of stories of Jobs setting impossible deadlines but having his team meet them.  

My problem with it is if Chris Gardner's tweets are true, it's crazy to me that they are taking a week off because the University is closed so they won't work on it.  How long can the report be that if they got it on Tuesday, they couldn't properly go through it and make a decision in 3 days?   This impacts both the accused and accusers.  

There is more to leadership than that but what I don't consider good leadership is if you just let things drag out when it impacts people and spend your time tweeting pics of flowers and cookies and not saying anything on when it should be done.  The process outlines that deadlines need to be set even.  

[gravilst]

He is at it again!

 @SLU_Here4You I thought sexual assault took a break for the holidays, since your office apparently does. But it happened again last night. On campus! In front of thousands! Why have you not responded to me? Is there a man there I can talk to?