Fall 2017 allegations against unnamed players (aka Situation 2)

[cheeseman]

1 hour ago, slufan13 said:

He was up in one of the boxes against Richmond. Not sure about last night. But he likes to hide in the box and pass it off as networking with guests 

I usually see him sitting on the floor but the last two games he was a no show on there.  Makes sense he could be in a box.

[slu72]

Someone posted Wellmer as a player next year. I think young Mr. Wellmer, who's not that young anymore, is done. Three years of foot problems? We were hoping for a mid season return this year, and he's still in a boot. Feel bad for him but it is what it is.

[Billboy1]

Maybe Wellmer could use that boot to encourage Fred to make a decision.

[Adman]

7 hours ago, GoBills73 said:

Glass Half Full/Trying to Remain Optimistic (Difficult)

-We heard from Graves' dad that from this past weekend he said we'd get a decision 'in a few days'.

-We know the HO clock is running out this week on levying a decision, correct?

-The rumor from TFord/Trav that decision was coming this Thursday.

Don't we have to hear something this week?

I'm another half-full guy, trying to remain optimistic. But hate to say it, I don't think there will be final decision until February, earliest.

First, there is no official clock in SLU's policy for this stage of the process. They take as long as they think warranted. HO meets with both parties, explains what the investigator found and possible punishments. Then allows each party to submit written questions they'd like the other party to answer. HO then reviews those questions, submits to the other parties, then gets answers back from them. This is a quasi-cross examination. Again, no time clock.

Then the HO renders a decision. But even if rumors you mention are correct -- the above steps are complete, and HO decides to make decision this week -- it is not the final decision. Nor will it be announced to the public. Only to the parties. If we hear anything, it will be more rumors, leaks.

Then the appeals phase begins. We don't know if one or more parties will appeal the HO decision. If no one does, it's over. But can't imagine no one will. A clock DOES then start, a 10-day clock. Long story short, the University has 10 "business days" (no weekends, holidays, etc) to render a final/final decision on appeal. But that's only if they maintain the 10-day clock in their policy. The SLU policy for every facet of the process, start to end, to be accomplished -- investigation, reports, HO meetings, decision and appeal -- is 60 days unless extraordinary circumstances. And Dr. Pestello has already announced they'll take the time necessary to do a good job. So I wouldn't hold my breath that they'll keep to the 10-day appeals clock any more than they have the overall 60-day clock.

By my count, even in the most optimistic scenario with a decision tomorrow, SLU keeping its 10-day appeals clock and counting "business" days only, the earliest final appeals decision date would be Jan 25. But realistically, it's February, or worse.

[Billboy1]

Delays are high risk activity

[Clock_Tower]

7 hours ago, Adman said:

By my count, even in the most optimistic scenario with a decision tomorrow, SLU keeping its 10-day appeals clock and counting "business" days only, the earliest final appeals decision date would be Jan 25. But realistically, it's February, or worse.

Again. Who suspended the boys and why? Obviously their suspension is not based upon this Title IX decision and its final outcome.

I fully expect the boys to be found guilty of  some SLU rules such as underage drinking, violating social media policy, housing policy violations, etc but not the major charges. Also, being found guilty of something hurts the boys’ claim against SLU. 

If the major charges are not violated, why would the boys’ not be allowed to return prior to the end of any final appeal?

[Bobby Metzinger]

3 hours ago, Clock_Tower said:

Again. Who suspended the boys and why? Obviously their suspension is not based upon this Title IX decision and its final outcome.

I fully expect the boys to be found guilty of  some SLU rules such as underage drinking, violating social media policy, housing policy violations, etc but not the major charges. Also, being found guilty of something hurts the boys’ claim against SLU. 

If the major charges are not violated, why would the boys’ not be allowed to return prior to the end of any final appeal?

Perhaps it's a quasi self-imposed sanction - May, Ford, etc. huddled and said "we're going to cooperate, perhaps in order to show our hand is one of understanding and that perhaps in the end, it will give us a chance for some mercy." Like some reverse psychology crap. Who knows. I think putting ones head in a blender is more soothing than trying to understand this $hit. 

 

[Billy Ken]

Outside of caring what's happening to all these young people, I'm past the point of worrying about this basketball season. All parties involved will have to live with this the rest of their lives. The longer it's dragged on the more it has hurt all parties involved. Not sure who to point finger at but it is sad.

[slu72]

12 minutes ago, Billy Ken said:

Outside of caring what's happening to all these young people, I'm past the point of worrying about this basketball season. All parties involved will have to live with this the rest of their lives. The longer it's dragged on the more it has hurt all parties involved. Not sure who to point finger at but it is sad.

Easy to understand your feelings about this season. But looking at it from a glass half full point of view, if, big if at this point, we get them back it's possible we could still salvage something from this year. We're 1-3 with 14 games left, and we just gave the best team in the conference a run for their money w/ a depleted roster. If the 3 are allowed to return in short order, they can only help. If Henriquez and Graves are as good as advertised, as we already know what Bishop brings to the floor, it's not unrealistic to expect a winning record in conference record. Taking it one step further, if the team really gelled and got some late season momentum going, we could do some damage in the tourney. I know that sounds like I've OD'd on blue koolaid, but why not look for a silver lining?  

[cheeseman]

5 hours ago, Clock_Tower said:

Again. Who suspended the boys and why? Obviously their suspension is not based upon this Title IX decision and its final outcome.

I fully expect the boys to be found guilty of  some SLU rules such as underage drinking, violating social media policy, housing policy violations, etc but not the major charges. Also, being found guilty of something hurts the boys’ claim against SLU. 

If the major charges are not violated, why would the boys’ not be allowed to return prior to the end of any final appeal?

You may be right about the rules violation but Title IX is not about breaking school rules so if the decision is in favor of the players then they can not have the same person then do a rules penalty.  Additionally, if the girl loses then she will be in violation of the rules for drinking or condom buying or whatever so I think if the decision is in favor of the players SLU just says we are done.

[Pistol]

At this point, I wouldn't expect anyone but Henriquez to play this season if they're cleared. He played 2 years at UCF, then sat a year for the transfer, and this is year 4 for him. You get five years to complete four years unless you get an NCAA waiver for another season, usually for medical or other non-optional reasons. His transfer year was his choice, so I'm not sure he'd get that year back if he decided to sit this season. So he seems like the only one with long-term incentive to play immediately.

[brianstl]

3 minutes ago, Pistol said:

At this point, I wouldn't expect anyone but Henriquez to play this season if they're cleared. He played 2 years at UCF, then sat a year for the transfer, and this is year 4 for him. You get five years to complete four years unless you get an NCAA waiver for another season, usually for medical or other non-optional reasons. His transfer year was his choice, so I'm not sure he'd get that year back if he decided to sit this season. So he seems like the only one with long-term incentive to play immediately.

I think you are really over estimating the chances of Bishop getting a redshirt.  If the decision comes down with over 30% of the season remaining, I think there is zero chance the NCAA grants him an extra year.  I think if it comes after that the chances still aren't great.  I think they will look at it much like a medical redshirt situation where you couldn't have possibly played in more than 30% of the games.  That said, even then the injury has to be season ending.  If the players have their suspensions lifted with even just one game to go, I think they have little chance of getting an extra year.  They might as well not roll the dice and just play the guys.

[Pistol]

14 minutes ago, brianstl said:

I think you are really over estimating the chances of Bishop getting a redshirt.  If the decision comes down with over 30% of the season remaining, I think there is zero chance the NCAA grants him an extra year.  I think if it comes after that the chances still aren't great.  I think they will look at it much like a medical redshirt situation where you couldn't have possibly played in more than 30% of the games.  That said, even then the injury has to be season ending.  If the players have their suspensions lifted with even just one game to go, I think they have little chance of getting an extra year.  They might as well not roll the dice and just play the guys.

Yeah, I'm just speculating. What do you think about Graves' chances, then? EDIT: Would Graves even need a waiver? He probably had the decision to play this semester or not all along, right?

Once we get a decision, we probably have to tack on two weeks for the appeal process. So even if we get an initial decision before classes start this semester, it's the end of January before they'd be able to play (probably). There are 8 scheduled games after January. So it could be under 30% by the time all is said and done, and that's with a favorable outcome.

[brianstl]

Just now, Pistol said:

Yeah, I'm just speculating. What do you think about Graves' chances, then?

Once we get a decision, we probably have to tack on two weeks for the appeal process. So even if we get an initial decision before classes start this semester, it's the end of January before they'd be able to play (probably). There are 8 scheduled games after January. So it could be under 30% by the time all is said and done, and that's with a favorable outcome.

Graves can sit the whole season and actually gain a half season of eligibility.  There is no way he should play.

[Pistol]

2 minutes ago, brianstl said:

Graves can sit the whole season and actually gain a half season of eligibility.  There is no way he should play.

That's right. I didn't get my edit in before your reply.

[RiseAndGrind]

5 minutes ago, Pistol said:

That's right. I didn't get my edit in before your reply.

I admit I’ve only glazed these past couple of posts, but how does graves pick up eligibility? If that’s the case - no way he should play this year 

[kshoe]

3 minutes ago, RiseAndGrind said:

I admit I’ve only glazed these past couple of posts, but how does graves pick up eligibility? If that’s the case - no way he should play this year 

He would have been eligible to only play half this season even before S2. Doing so would use the entirety of his 2nd year of eligibility (the half season he played last year was his first). He could sit out the entirety of this season and start the next year as a redshirt sophomore with 3 full years still to play.

[wgstl]

6 minutes ago, kshoe said:

He would have been eligible to only play half this season even before S2. Doing so would use the entirety of his 2nd year of eligibility (the half season he played last year was his first). He could sit out the entirety of this season and start the next year as a redshirt sophomore with 3 full years still to play.

ahhhh this makes sense. 

[Slu let the dogs out?]

When all of the dust settles, I just don't see how all three are wearing a Billikens uniform next year. What's that based on you ask? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

[dlarry]

2 hours ago, Billy Ken said:

Outside of caring what's happening to all these young people, I'm past the point of worrying about this basketball season. All parties involved will have to live with this the rest of their lives. The longer it's dragged on the more it has hurt all parties involved. Not sure who to point finger at but it is sad.

At this point the only thing I'm excited about is The Red Panda and Baby races.

[slufan13]

This is an interesting tweet especially if the rumor that wgstl heard is true about a decision coming today.

[dlarry]

18 minutes ago, slufan13 said:

This is an interesting tweet especially if the rumor that wgstl heard is true about a decision coming today.

Basketball team on strike?

That would be interesting? 

[wgstl]

25 minutes ago, slufan13 said:

This is an interesting tweet especially if the rumor that wgstl heard is true about a decision coming today.

I take this like, news is coming and i love my teammates. simple, but interesting to say the least

[slufan13]

Bishop is traveling with the team today so if a decision didn't come this morning, I guess it isn't coming today. If a decision did come this morning, I guess he didn't get expelled. 

[Littlebill]

4 minutes ago, slufan13 said:

Bishop is traveling with the team today so if a decision didn't come this morning, I guess it isn't coming today. If a decision did come this morning, I guess he didn't get expelled. 

What about Henriquez or Graves?