MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[GoPerry]

I was at the Augie Wheaton game last night but was not sitting that close to the "rowdy" Augie fans. However, I  do not feel their behavior was that over the top. Certainly some high school level immaturity demonstrated, but I do not believe it had any impact on the players or the result of the game. Perhaps Coach Schauer was a little thin skinned after a narrow loss and over reacted.

That's certainly a plausible explanation. All I could hear from them on the webcast were "Bullsh*t!" and "Airball!" chants, the latter of which were directed at Aston Francis. That doesn't mean that they didn't say anything worse, of course, since as I said I had to turn down the sound on the Wheaton student broadcasters. (Where are Bryan Holmgren and Paul Carr when you need them?!) 

First, I also frequently mute the Wheaton student announcers who not only routinely mis-pronounce names but over-analyze routine plays in over-the-top ways as if their audience, (taking the time to sit in front of a computer to watch a streamed broadcast mind you) knows nothing about the game of basketball.  There are a few exceptions like Rusty Lindsey who does a good job on the pbp and the occasional too-infrequent guest appearance of Nate Frank.  While I'm appreciative of these students volunteering their time to do it, I rather wish Julie Davis could up-tier this with 1. permanent good announcers- not students or 2. perhaps at least some training?

Second, I'm disappointed that the Augie fans( or fans from any school for that matter) in question would use vulgarity and obscene language in their taunting.  D3 games are a great product and fan accessible, especially families with young kids.  To me, I don't think it's unreasonable for AD's and conference administrators, with support of coaches, to try and set some expectations for at least the language.  Of course it's very difficult to enforce, especially with college students (who seem to have less and less group behavioral norms and believe it's always ok to say whatever they wish whenever they wish).  Should this be the responsibility of the home team only?  Tough to say what would really be effective.

On the other hand, I'm not surprised it's degraded into this given the prevalence of general taunting towards players and coaches on the court that take place.  Some of it, while clean, is directed quite personally at players and Wheaton football and swim team members participate as much as or more than many schools I've seen.  So the only difference to me is the level of profanity which is likely no distinction at all to some fans.

[Hightops]

WOW!   Shauers post game comments specifically called out the Augustana football players for some of the comments made during the game. He did congratulate Giovanine and the players, but I didn't know he had such a good grasp of the Augie football roster.  Very strange.

Well, to be fair to Mike Schauer, it's usually not hard to determine whether or not a group of college-aged males are football players, even if you don't know who they are.

He really did lay into those Augie football players, though. He said that he complained to Grey about them, and that he's going to give Chris Martin a phone call about them, too. I didn't have the sound up on that game the whole way through (I got tired of the Wheaton broadcasters referring to Dylan "Sore-tee-ya"), but I did hear a popular barnyard epithet chanted a few times from what sounded like a group of males not too far from the camera mic after calls went against Augie.

For several years the most outrageously over-the-line student basketball fans have been those at Augustana. I'm talking about the group of 20-30 that sits/stands in the first couple of rows of bleachers right at about mid court. I don't know if they are football players or not, but I suspect that at least a good percentage are. They regularly assail visiting coaches and players with a variety of obscene comments and otherwise behave like hyenas. I've seen several occasions, both in person and when I've watched Augie home games, when a visiting team had the ball out right near this group and the students stood up literally within a foot or two of the player throwing the ball in, screaming and waving their arms back and forth. The thing is the Augie authorities have never made any move to control the students in any way. Essentially, they are enabling the students obnoxious behavior. Perhaps a good portion of the students who were at Wheaton were members of this group and acted in the same manner that they have been allowed to get away with back on their home turf.

WRONGThis is simply not true Andone.  For the past several years, the Augustana athletic director has stood off to the left of the student section at Carver and closely monitored their actions and words.  In fact, if you arrive early enough you will see him interacting with alot of the Carver Crazies as they have a good relationship.  I would go one step further and say that CCIW game officials would tell you that Augustana game management is one of the most visible and accessible in the conference.

[AndOne]

GoPerry,

With the number of games that I attend, I don't get to listen to too many local broadcasts. However, I have been fortunate enough to have heard Nate Frank a couple of times. I believe that on those occasions, he was functioning as the analyst as opposed to the PBP guy. I fully concur with your opinion that his appearances can certainly be classified as "too infrequent," as you indicated. He is at or very near the top of the list of D3 broadcasters that I've heard. I sense that with a little additional experience, that he could be successful on a higher level than D3 if he were so inclined. Especially considering the product we hear from some of the so called experts on the networks that cover D1.

I have watched a number of D3 broadcasts, usually from other regions, on Saturday afternoons when we have a night game, or on weeknights other than Wednesday. Most often student broadcasters are doing the games. Two of the main problems I have observed with student broadcasters are 1) Homerism--they tend to sensationalize routine plays by the home team, and fail to give enough
credit to the visitors when they make above average or even great plays, and 2) Inconsistency--they make a good call on a play, and then say something off the wall or just plain wrong on the next play. They sometimes also tend to drift into talking about stuff that has nothing to do with the game-some other activity on campus, or a recent personal experience such as where they plan on going for dinner and why, or who won the recent dorm floor video game championship.
I also think this is to be expected to some degree. These kids are college students and still learning. They aren't pros or even seasoned amateurs. Unlike our own Greg Sager,  they haven't had time to develop a "style" or learned that correct pronunciation of the players names is an important part of the broadcast. 
Still, its nice that so many games from around the country are now available.

[AndOne]

WOW!   Shauers post game comments specifically called out the Augustana football players for some of the comments made during the game. He did congratulate Giovanine and the players, but I didn't know he had such a good grasp of the Augie football roster.  Very strange.

Well, to be fair to Mike Schauer, it's usually not hard to determine whether or not a group of college-aged males are football players, even if you don't know who they are.

He really did lay into those Augie football players, though. He said that he complained to Grey about them, and that he's going to give Chris Martin a phone call about them, too. I didn't have the sound up on that game the whole way through (I got tired of the Wheaton broadcasters referring to Dylan "Sore-tee-ya"), but I did hear a popular barnyard epithet chanted a few times from what sounded like a group of males not too far from the camera mic after calls went against Augie.

For several years the most outrageously over-the-line student basketball fans have been those at Augustana. I'm talking about the group of 20-30 that sits/stands in the first couple of rows of bleachers right at about mid court. I don't know if they are football players or not, but I suspect that at least a good percentage are. They regularly assail visiting coaches and players with a variety of obscene comments and otherwise behave like hyenas. I've seen several occasions, both in person and when I've watched Augie home games, when a visiting team had the ball out right near this group and the students stood up literally within a foot or two of the player throwing the ball in, screaming and waving their arms back and forth. The thing is the Augie authorities have never made any move to control the students in any way. Essentially, they are enabling the students obnoxious behavior. Perhaps a good portion of the students who were at Wheaton were members of this group and acted in the same manner that they have been allowed to get away with back on their home turf.

This is simply not true Andone.  For the past several years, the Augustana athletic director has stood off to the left of the student section at Carver and closely monitored their actions and words.  In fact, if you arrive early enough you will see him interacting with alot of the Carver Crazies as they have a good relationship.  I would go one step further and say that CCIW game officials would tell you that Augustana game management is one of the most visible and accessible in the conference.

I will assume that the situation you describe is often the case, Hightops.

However, I have personally been at games where the "Carver Crazies," as you refer to them, have indeed been allowed to go crazy. Profanities directed at opposing coaches and players, students actually on the playing floor-which is only a couple of feet/steps from where they stand in front of the first row of bleachers. I've even been at games at Carver where an adult was positioned near the student horde, but did little or nothing to curtail their outrageous behavior to any measurable degree.

So, while I'm sure they are well behaved on occasion, I assure you such is not always the case.
Also, are most or many of the "crazies" football players?
And, if they are so well behaved at Carver, how do you account for the highly divergent behavior as described by Wheaton Coach Schauer on their recent visit to King Arena?

[Gregory Sager]

I was at the Augie Wheaton game last night but was not sitting that close to the "rowdy" Augie fans. However, I  do not feel their behavior was that over the top. Certainly some high school level immaturity demonstrated, but I do not believe it had any impact on the players or the result of the game. Perhaps Coach Schauer was a little thin skinned after a narrow loss and over reacted.

That's certainly a plausible explanation. All I could hear from them on the webcast were "Bullsh*t!" and "Airball!" chants, the latter of which were directed at Aston Francis. That doesn't mean that they didn't say anything worse, of course, since as I said I had to turn down the sound on the Wheaton student broadcasters. (Where are Bryan Holmgren and Paul Carr when you need them?!) 

First, I also frequently mute the Wheaton student announcers who not only routinely mis-pronounce names but over-analyze routine plays in over-the-top ways as if their audience, (taking the time to sit in front of a computer to watch a streamed broadcast mind you) knows nothing about the game of basketball.  There are a few exceptions like Rusty Lindsey who does a good job on the pbp and the occasional too-infrequent guest appearance of Nate Frank.  While I'm appreciative of these students volunteering their time to do it, I rather wish Julie Davis could up-tier this with 1. permanent good announcers- not students or 2. perhaps at least some training?

Rusty would be a big improvement, as he's an experienced basketball broadcaster. But isn't he working the table now? I can't imagine that Brett Marhanka would willingly want to part with one of his table staff unless he has a ready replacement at hand, as people with both the experience and the desire to work the scorer's table don't grow on trees. Nate, of course, is the gold standard for basketball commentators. He's as good as anyone I've ever heard work a D3 basketball game; he's articulate, quick, modulates well, knows the sport backwards and forwards, knows the league and the personalities involved, even-handed, good sense of humor, good timing and pacing, can tell a good story when the occasion is appropriate, and he understands the commentator's role. Like Mark, I think that Nate could make a career out of it. I would love to work a game with Nate someday. I just haven't been able to connect with him on a night in which he's free.

Schools that have active media departments as a part of their academic or vocational offerings can get caught in a dilemma. On the one hand, broadcasting school sporting events is a natural way for students who may have an interest in a communications career to gain experience, which makes it an educational function and thus part of the school's mission to its students. It might also be a draw for prospective students. And there's the further concern that you have to pay non-students to do the job. On the other hand, student broadcasters are a decidedly mixed bag. Some, like the two Wheaton alumni I mentioned (Bryan Holmgren and Paul Carr), take to it like a duck to water and are a pleasure to listen to. But a lot of them -- most of them, I'd say -- flounder, either by over-analyzing or going over the top (like the current Wheaton guys) or by being unprofessional or awkward. They clearly don't get much feedback on how to improve what they're doing, and a lot of them never figure out that they're supposed to do their homework before a game rather than wing it. Many student broadcasters are minimally informed or completely uninformed about the opposition or the league, and, as we all know, when it comes to names they tend to be worse butchers than a trainee in the Jewel meat department. With paid staff you're getting people who generally know what they're doing, are aware that they have to sound professional as well as modulate their enthusiasm (and their homerism), and, if they've been around long enough, they know the teams and the league involved.

[Hightops]

WOW!   Shauers post game comments specifically called out the Augustana football players for some of the comments made during the game. He did congratulate Giovanine and the players, but I didn't know he had such a good grasp of the Augie football roster.  Very strange.

Well, to be fair to Mike Schauer, it's usually not hard to determine whether or not a group of college-aged males are football players, even if you don't know who they are.

He really did lay into those Augie football players, though. He said that he complained to Grey about them, and that he's going to give Chris Martin a phone call about them, too. I didn't have the sound up on that game the whole way through (I got tired of the Wheaton broadcasters referring to Dylan "Sore-tee-ya"), but I did hear a popular barnyard epithet chanted a few times from what sounded like a group of males not too far from the camera mic after calls went against Augie.

For several years the most outrageously over-the-line student basketball fans have been those at Augustana. I'm talking about the group of 20-30 that sits/stands in the first couple of rows of bleachers right at about mid court. I don't know if they are football players or not, but I suspect that at least a good percentage are. They regularly assail visiting coaches and players with a variety of obscene comments and otherwise behave like hyenas. I've seen several occasions, both in person and when I've watched Augie home games, when a visiting team had the ball out right near this group and the students stood up literally within a foot or two of the player throwing the ball in, screaming and waving their arms back and forth. The thing is the Augie authorities have never made any move to control the students in any way. Essentially, they are enabling the students obnoxious behavior. Perhaps a good portion of the students who were at Wheaton were members of this group and acted in the same manner that they have been allowed to get away with back on their home turf.

This is simply not true Andone.  For the past several years, the Augustana athletic director has stood off to the left of the student section at Carver and closely monitored their actions and words.  In fact, if you arrive early enough you will see him interacting with alot of the Carver Crazies as they have a good relationship.  I would go one step further and say that CCIW game officials would tell you that Augustana game management is one of the most visible and accessible in the conference.

I will assume that the situation you describe is often the case, Hightops.

However, I have personally been at games where the "Carver Crazies," as you refer to them, have indeed been allowed to go crazy. Profanities directed at opposing coaches and players, students actually on the playing floor-which is only a couple of feet/steps from where they stand in front of the first row of bleachers. I've even been at games at Carver where an adult was positioned near the student horde, but did little or nothing to curtail their outrageous behavior to any measurable degree.

So, while I'm sure they are well behaved on occasion, I assure you such is not always the case.
Also, are most or many of the "crazies" football players?
And, if they are so well behaved at Carver, how do you account for the highly divergent behavior as described by Wheaton Coach Schauer on their recent visit to King Arena?

I don't know the make up of the Carver Crazies besides being students and I don't the exact facts of what happened at Wheaton so I shouldn't speculate.  Which was my point to you on speculating about how "Augie authorities have never made any move..."  Leave the alternative facts to President Trump.   

[AndOne]

Hightops,

As I said, I have been at Carver when a) there was no adult near the student section, and b) there was an adult in close or fairly close proximity to the students, but he did little or nothing to curtail the student's actions. That's a fact. No speculation involved!

I also said I'm willing to accept that the circumstances you describe are often, not always, the case. So, my speculation in that regard is actually favorable to your point of view. 

[Gregory Sager]

Second, I'm disappointed that the Augie fans( or fans from any school for that matter) in question would use vulgarity and obscene language in their taunting.  D3 games are a great product and fan accessible, especially families with young kids.  To me, I don't think it's unreasonable for AD's and conference administrators, with support of coaches, to try and set some expectations for at least the language.  Of course it's very difficult to enforce, especially with college students (who seem to have less and less group behavioral norms and believe it's always ok to say whatever they wish whenever they wish).  Should this be the responsibility of the home team only?  Tough to say what would really be effective.

I think that it's the responsibility of the game management staff to control unruly behavior, including vulgarity and obscene language. Part of game management staff in a lot of gyms (probably most of them, in fact) is a coach or administrator who is assigned to be on hand in order to step in and be the final voice of authority if things get out of hand. F'rinstance, you always see Elmhurst AD Paul Krohn on hand at games in Faganel Hall -- he's a ubiquitous presence at all EC sporting events, but he's especially conspicuous in the gym at basketball games. Anybody who's ever been to a game at Faganel or watched one on the Internet would recognize him. His North Park counterpart, Jack Surridge, is on hand at every NPU game unless he's out of town at a meeting; he doesn't patrol the perimeter of the floor in an obvious way like Paul Krohn does, but he's there -- and he's stepped in and spoken to fans (usually students) when necessary more than once. When he's not there in the crackerbox, head baseball coach and assistant athletic director Luke Johnson is the man in charge. And, as Hightops said, Augie AD Mike Zapolski's often visible in Carver during games. (He wasn't when I was there in December, but Associate AD Dave Wrath stationed himself right next to the Augie student section, which is undoubtedly why they were relatively mild-mannered for the NPU @ AC game, as I said yesterday.)

The league has established norms of behavior, via the official sportsmanship statement, although it's not spelled out in detail as to what is permissible and what isn't for fans, and how far something has to go in order to be interpreted as being over the line and requiring discipline. That's a judgment call that's left in the hands of the game management staff of whatever school is hosting the event.

The more that I think about it, the more I'm convinced that Mike Schauer should've directed his post-game ire on Wednesday at his own school's staff for not curbing the behavior of the Augie students. It's not Grey Giovanine's responsibility, nor Augie AD Mike Zapolski's responsibility, nor CCIW commish Chris Martin's responsibility, to enforce the CCIW sportsmanship statement:

The colleges and universities of the College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin believe that good sportsmanship is an integral component of intercollegiate competition. The College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin wholeheartedly embraces the NCAA position that in order for good sportsmanship to prevail, coaches, student-athletes, and fans must display respect, fairness, civility, honesty, and responsibility before, during, and after all athletic contests. The College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin encourages fans to enthusiastically support their team, recognize the outstanding performance of opponents, and always exhibit good sportsmanship in their words and actions.

... at an event in King Arena. It should be Wheaton's responsibility to enforce that statement on the spot.

On the other hand, I'm not surprised it's degraded into this given the prevalence of general taunting towards players and coaches on the court that take place.  Some of it, while clean, is directed quite personally at players and Wheaton football and swim team members participate as much as or more than many schools I've seen.  So the only difference to me is the level of profanity which is likely no distinction at all to some fans.

I definitely agree on both counts. It's nothing new, either. Taunting opposing players has been around for as long as I've been around the league; heck, my friends and I took special pride in our ability to get inside the heads of North Park's opponents back in the day. We always drew the line at profanity, but, as you said, that's not a distinction that a lot of fans recognize nowadays.

A lot of enforcing the sportsmanship statement comes down to making judgment calls. To me, the use of profanity seems like a bright line in making such a call. But, as I said, nobody from the league has ever spelled out any particular standards.

As a side note, proximity to the floor is something that needs to be carefully monitored as well. The NPU game management staff frequently endeavors to keep fans out of the floor-level seats on the north side of the gym, although sometimes that duty gets neglected. I'd like to see the same thing happen at Carver, where fans are likewise right on top of the court if they're in the front row.

[matblake]

Some cool promos for the CCIW, which according to Twitter were put together by NC17 in Naperville.  There's a long and short version.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=cciw

[AndOne]

* If I interpreted the original info on this correctly, it seemed like Wofford was the "victim" in the initial incident.
* Given #1, this second round, resulting in action against Wofford, suggests retaliation may have been involved on the part of the victim in the initial incident.
* If Wofford was dismissed "for unspecified school violations," I wonder what type of a action was serious enough to get him kicked off the basketball team, but not out of school given that it was a school violation? 
* Perhaps Wofford's dismissal from the team was a compromise of sorts. Punish him by kicking him off the team, but show "mercy" by letting him remain in school (and paying tuition). 

I think you're getting into some real dangerous territory here, Mark. All Greg said was, "I keep wondering if there was some sort of second chapter to the George Edlund incident from last summer."  That's fair and I wonder the same thing.  But, a) there is no evidence that what is going on with Wofford has anything to do with that incident over the summer (in which he was a victim), and b) you are taking things a huge step farther in suggesting that it is related and that Wofford retaliated.  You are speculating on what is just a speculation by Greg -- in a public forum like this, I believe that really crosses the line of what is fair and appropriate.

Bob,

1) You quoted Greg about wondering if the recent activity involving Mr. Wofford (the victim last summer) was some sort of 2nd chapter to the George Edlund (last summer's perpetrator) incident of that time. You indicated you wonder the same thing.

2) You stated there is no evidence that Wofford's recent actions have anything to do with last summer's incident. I merely suggested if it is the 2nd round--as you, yourself wondered--that retaliation "MAY have been involved." Look carefully Bob---the word "was" isn't there. And last time I checked, "may" and "was" had different meanings. 

3) Then you said "you are speculating on what is just a speculation by Greg" (AND YOU)
So, evidently, we have speculation on speculation.   Who knew?
In other words when Greg and you speculate its OK. But when I do it, its wrong. Very logical.
Hmmmm.......What was that regarding crossing the line about what's fair?

[AndOne]

North Central 82, Carroll 72
Down by a point at the half in the airplane hangar, the Cardinals finally grabbed the lead for good in what had been a seesaw game on a pair of Alex Sorenson FTs three minutes into the second half. They slowly built the lead up to 15 in the last few minutes before riding it out to the ten-point win. It was a three-man show for the Redbirds, who got 22 and six from Sorenson, 22 and six assists (with only one turnover) and three steals from Jagger Anderson, and 21 and eight from Matt Cappelletti. Aiden Chang had six boards as well. Carroll was paced by Tanner Zaeske's 17 and seven, while Nick Penny scored 14 and Ben Widdes had a dozen for the Pios. The Cards dominated on the boards by ten rebounds (ten on the offensive glass as well), and had a really nice team a:to of 20:4.

* NCC got a little shot of defense at halftime. After allowing Carroll to score at a 56.5% clip in the 1st half, the Cardinals cut that down to 42.1% after intermission.

* As Greg reported above, North Central had an amazingly low 4 turnovers compared with 20 assists. PG Jagger Anderson had 6 helpers as did 2G/PG Aiden Chang. Both had only 1 turnover. Tommy Koth came in at 3 and 0.

* The Cardinals 33 (13 offensive) to 23 rebounding advantage helped them to enjoy a 34-16 advantage in points in the paint, and a 17-3 advantage in 2nd chance points.

* With Alex Sorenson and Jagger Anderson each scoring 22 points, and Matt Cappelletti adding 21, it marked the first time since 11/24/09 (vs. Aurora in triple OT) that NCC had as many as three 20 point scorers in the same game.

* Anderson's 22 points and Cappelletti's 21 were both career highs.

* The game was VERY chippy almost from start to finish. Lots of chirping and outright taunts being liberally exchanged throughout.

* The Cardinal defense held leading Carroll scorer Kyle Keranen to 1 for 7 and Ben Widdes to 1 for 6. But don't put the Pioneers on the line. The four CU starting guards hit a perfect combined 19 for 19. The team went 22 for 25. Carroll is not a physically imposing team. I think shooting and quickness are their primary strong points. Don't ever leave Nick Penny alone!

* Cardinal freshman Matt Cappelletti has now started the last 5 games. They are the first starts of his career. Early in the season Matt didn't play a minute in 4 games, and he played a total of 3 minutes in 2 other games. In the 14 games where he has played more than 10 minutes he is averaging 9.1 PPG and 7.3 RPG. In his 5 starts he has scored 13, 14, 5, 6, and 21 points, and has grabbed 13, 10, 14, 10, and 8 rebounds. He currently leads the CCIW in defensive rebounds, averaging 7.11 per game. 

[Gregory Sager]

Some cool promos for the CCIW, which according to Twitter were put together by NC17 in Naperville.  There's a long and short version.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=cciw

Very cool!

[WUPHF]

I love those CCIW promo videos...

Carroll has a nice promotional video along those lines: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwWVVIIjU3Q

[Augie6]

* If I interpreted the original info on this correctly, it seemed like Wofford was the "victim" in the initial incident.
* Given #1, this second round, resulting in action against Wofford, suggests retaliation may have been involved on the part of the victim in the initial incident.
* If Wofford was dismissed "for unspecified school violations," I wonder what type of a action was serious enough to get him kicked off the basketball team, but not out of school given that it was a school violation? 
* Perhaps Wofford's dismissal from the team was a compromise of sorts. Punish him by kicking him off the team, but show "mercy" by letting him remain in school (and paying tuition). 

I think you're getting into some real dangerous territory here, Mark. All Greg said was, "I keep wondering if there was some sort of second chapter to the George Edlund incident from last summer."  That's fair and I wonder the same thing.  But, a) there is no evidence that what is going on with Wofford has anything to do with that incident over the summer (in which he was a victim), and b) you are taking things a huge step farther in suggesting that it is related and that Wofford retaliated.  You are speculating on what is just a speculation by Greg -- in a public forum like this, I believe that really crosses the line of what is fair and appropriate.

Bob,

1) You quoted Greg about wondering if the recent activity involving Mr. Wofford (the victim last summer) was some sort of 2nd chapter to the George Edlund (last summer's perpetrator) incident of that time. You indicated you wonder the same thing.

2) You stated there is no evidence that Wofford's recent actions have anything to do with last summer's incident. I merely suggested if it is the 2nd round--as you, yourself wondered--that retaliation "MAY have been involved." Look carefully Bob---the word "was" isn't there. And last time I checked, "may" and "was" had different meanings. 

3) Then you said "you are speculating on what is just a speculation by Greg" (AND YOU)
So, evidently, we have speculation on speculation.   Who knew?
In other words when Greg and you speculate its OK. But when I do it, its wrong. Very logical.
Hmmmm.......What was that regarding crossing the line about what's fair?

Personally, I think ANY and ALL speculation about the Wofford situation is inappropriate, particularly when those posting about it have admitted they don't have any information about what happened.  The school is not going to report anything and I would hope that any Augie fans with knowledge of what went on, wouldn't feel the need to post it on this board.  So unless someone has concrete information on what happened and feels a need to post that info (which I hope they wouldn't), I would suggest any continued speculation, stop. 

[Mr. Ypsi]

Anyone with an update on Connor Raridon's status?  If he doesn't come back this season, anyone have insight as to whether he would take a medical redshirt?  (Even those who can do so, rarely do at D3 privates due to tuition, especially for a two-semester sport like bball.  But with his dad the HC, I assume he gets sharply reduced or free tuition - correct?)