St. Louis has lost to LaSalle and is now 0-2 in the conference. Their next game is against the Bonnies at home. If they lose, SLU will be 0-3 in the league. I expect that they wish they would have played us.
About St. Louis
- Thread starter Gallipoli
- Start date
Dude, despite our assertions, it seems their reservations were correct -- we had a player(s) with Covid. St. Louis is one more pause from not hitting the minimum # of games. Trust me, they definitely don't wish they played us.
Right now, SLU at 0-2 has the second worst record in the league, which is in front of St. Joes. Another loss will cost them any hope of an at large bid and any post season play.
We didn't have a player with COVID on the day the game was scheduled to be played. Sort of an important distinction, IMO.
They saw something was off, despite the assertions of our AD and Mooney.
Their decision is completely vindicated.
No question. If the teams are cleared to play, you should play. Teams are having covid issues all over the place, and canceling games, so we have no idea exactly when we got our latest covid issue. But, we do know both teams were cleared to play, so I give St. Louis no credit for canceling on us.
It was their right to do that, at least according to the A10. I'm just saying that no one on our team had COVID at the time we were scheduled to play them, which is accurate.
I don't know how anyone can believe what Hardt or Mooney said. They said we were cleared to play, but yet whatever SLU found out was obviously enough for the league to allow SLU to go home without playing. And then 2 days later we shut down on a COVID pause, that is gonna be at least 2 weeks.
Hardt and Mooney have a huge credibility issue right now with the rest of the league regarding COVID, every single team we play from here on out is going to scrutinize our protocols with a fine tooth comb and they damn well should because we have lax procedures AND weren't upfront about them when questioned.
I am not sure what folks are trying to prove on here. SLU was not afraid to play us, they are still playing, we are still watching.
As we already did they first played themselves out of the rankings and are now playing themselves out of the category of "others receiving votes".
I'm far from a Mooney or Hardt apologist, but if every single one of our players tested negative the day of the game, I'm having a hard time blaming us for the game not happening.
And, they are also 0-2 after losing to LaSalle. They know they can't afford too many more losses, if any.
Like us they just need to get to 14-4 in A10 and will be good to go.
Well, it not just testing negative that day. It appears that SLU saw through our contract tracing that one of our players had an exposure to someone with COVID and obviously that exposure with enough to both scare them off AND then led to that player testing positive, 2 days later.
Reading between the lines perhaps SLU demanded that player sit out, we said, no he's fine, look he tested negative and then SLU with the blessing of the A-10 then said, nope we aren't playing you. A decision that has been vindicated now in spades.
I am further presuming that said player is probably one of our key guys, it it were one of our walk-ons or freshman who don't play a lot and SLU demanded they sit out, we probably would have played but it more than likely was a starter and we balked at that.
Would love to know the real story here but we probably never will.
Exactly. It seems pretty obvious they were able to project a good possibility we would have problems in the coming days. Playing that game very well could have forced SLU to go on another pause, one which would effectively end their season.
But hey, pom-poms thinks it's reasonable to ask another team to risk their entire season to squeeze in one game against a team about to go back into coronapause.
My conjecture...
A rarely used player tested negative, his girlfriend tested positive. Then they kissed to celebrate.
SLU asked that he sit out. We agreed but he kissed all the other players goodbye first.
SLU said "We are out!"
{Disclaimer, it is highly unlikely any of this bares any resemblance to reality}
That's asking a lot of SLU to play three road games in five days, even if it's all in the same city.
I think more likely we head to Bona for a Tues or Wed game. They play at GW on Sunday (assuming GW comes off pause) and then don't play again until hosting Dayton the following Sunday.
I think more likely we head to Bona for a Tues or Wed game. They play at GW on Sunday (assuming GW comes off pause) and then don't play again until hosting Dayton the following Sunday.
Maybe it is, but how badly do they want twoQ1 games? They need to play a bunch more games somehow, and this helps. I guess another option is we go out there for Friday and Sunday games, which I'm fine with because that's two more Q1 chances for us. Just seems dumb when everyone will be in Richmond to fly back to St. Louis to play.
Similar threads
