ADVERTISEMENT

Shannon is back

The court order basically allows him to practice - doesn’t mean Underwood has to start or play him. High stakes poker at this point. If he plays him and he is found guilt, Underwood and AD can kiss their careers goodbye.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Poprudy and goboilers2
ChoiceBeef said:
The court order basically allows him to practice - doesn’t mean Underwood has to start or play him. High stakes poker at this point. If he plays him and he is found guilt, Underwood and AD can kiss their careers goodbye.
Click to expand...
If they don't play him, they will piss off a federal judge and end up back in court.

He'll play.
 
ChoiceBeef said:
The court order basically allows him to practice - doesn’t mean Underwood has to start or play him. High stakes poker at this point. If he plays him and he is found guilt, Underwood and AD can kiss their careers goodbye.
Click to expand...
What an awful distraction for this team. It seemed to have pulled them together when they lost him. How will they deal with all of the attention having him back?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Poprudy, Heads up BOILER, ChoiceBeef and 1 other person
ChoiceBeef said:
The court order basically allows him to practice - doesn’t mean Underwood has to start or play him. High stakes poker at this point. If he plays him and he is found guilt, Underwood and AD can kiss their careers goodbye.
Click to expand...
I disagree. He’s been reinstated to the team by a federal judge because his due process rights were violated. He’s innocent until proven guilty. So, why would playing him affect the coach’s or AD’s careers? And, if he gets DNP’d - coach’s decision, that amounts to a continuation of the suspension and flouting the court’s order. I feel pretty confident the University’s counsel will advise against benching him because they won’t want to appear before a federal judge on the show cause motion that Shannon’s lawyers will file seeking a contempt of court citation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Poprudy, all4theillini, Longboat Boiler and 3 others
KenTre1983 said:
I disagree. He’s been reinstated to the team by a federal judge because his due process rights were violated. He’s innocent until proven guilty. So, why would playing him affect the coach’s or AD’s careers? And, if he gets DNP’d - coach’s decision, that amounts to a continuation of the suspension and flouting the court’s order. I feel pretty confident the University’s counsel will advise against benching him because they won’t want to appear before a federal judge on the show cause motion that Shannon’s lawyers will file seeking a contempt of court citation.
Click to expand...
His due process rights weren’t violated. Coaches and universities can suspend players for conduct detrimental to the team/university. Being charged with a crime would be an example of conduct detrimental. Playing basketball is a privilege, and innocent until proven guilty only applies in a court of law. I’m sure he will play, but to say that he has to play based on this court order is a laughably wrong. The court order basically says he has to be reinstated. There is absolutely no way a judge can dictate minutes on a basketball team. Otherwise posters on this board would be filing injunctions to make sure the flavor of the week (Colvin? Heide?) gets more minutes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Poprudy, goboilers2, tjreese and 6 others
KenTre1983 said:
I disagree. He’s been reinstated to the team by a federal judge because his due process rights were violated. He’s innocent until proven guilty. So, why would playing him affect the coach’s or AD’s careers? And, if he gets DNP’d - coach’s decision, that amounts to a continuation of the suspension and flouting the court’s order. I feel pretty confident the University’s counsel will advise against benching him because they won’t want to appear before a federal judge on the show cause motion that Shannon’s lawyers will file seeking a contempt of court citation.
Click to expand...
That's nonsense. A judge isn't going to rule that way. So if he plays one minute, that's good enough? How many minutes will escape the judge's wrath? The judge ain't engaging in that kind of minutiae. He's back on the team. Whether he plays in a game or how much he plays will remain with the coaching staff. They can not play him at all, or play him token minutes or a full game. The judge isn't going to get involved in that. As long as he can practice, and dress and sit on the bench that satisfies the order.

Plus, even his return is conditional: "Defendants are enjoined from suspending Plaintiff from the basketball team without at least affording him the protections of the [Office of Student Conflict Resolution] Policy." So if that policy is followed, and he gets those protections, and it's then determined he should be suspended, then the school is good to go. Sounds to me like the issue here isn't purely the suspension, but that Illinois didn't follow whatever due process procedural policy they have in deciding these types of issues. So, Illinois needs to do that, and then go from there. None of that requires the coach to play anyone he doesn't want to play.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: tjreese, New Pal Boiler, ChoiceBeef and 3 others
qazplm said:
That's nonsense. A judge isn't going to rule that way. So if he plays one minute, that's good enough? How many minutes will escape the judge's wrath? The judge ain't engaging in that kind of minutiae. He's back on the team. Whether he plays in a game or how much he plays will remain with the coaching staff. They can not play him at all, or play him token minutes or a full game. The judge isn't going to get involved in that. As long as he can practice, and dress and sit on the bench that satisfies the order.

Plus, even his return is conditional: "Defendants are enjoined from suspending Plaintiff from the basketball team without at least affording him the protections of the [Office of Student Conflict Resolution] Policy." So if that policy is followed, and he gets those protections, and it's then determined he should be suspended, then the school is good to go. Sounds to me like the issue here isn't purely the suspension, but that Illinois didn't follow whatever due process procedural policy they have in deciding these types of issues. So, Illinois needs to do that, and then go from there. None of that requires the coach to play anyone he doesn't want to play.
Click to expand...
Oh, look who’s back. Mr. Know-it-All. Welcome back, Timmy.
 
“Plaintiff’s participation in sports is vital to the development of his career as well as his current and future economic opportunities considering plaintiff’s intention to declare for the 2024 NBA Draft,” Lawless wrote in the order issued Friday. “Prior to his suspension, plaintiff was projected to be a lottery pick in the NBA. His participation in future games impact his prospects in the draft and his earning potential.

The obligations of Defendants pursuant to this Order are to be construed as broadly as possible.”

And, Underwood will play him going forward.

I’ll stand by my interpretation of the injunction. No way they could sit him, absent going through whatever process the university has and re-suspending him, without finding themselves back in court. He was a starter. The only reason he wouldn’t play is because the university was punishing him and/or retaliating against him for taking them to court.
 
KenTre1983 said:
“Plaintiff’s participation in sports is vital to the development of his career as well as his current and future economic opportunities considering plaintiff’s intention to declare for the 2024 NBA Draft,” Lawless wrote in the order issued Friday. “Prior to his suspension, plaintiff was projected to be a lottery pick in the NBA. His participation in future games impact his prospects in the draft and his earning potential.

The obligations of Defendants pursuant to this Order are to be construed as broadly as possible.”

And, Underwood will play him going forward.

I’ll stand by my interpretation of the injunction. No way they could sit him, absent going through whatever process the university has and re-suspending him, without finding themselves back in court. He was a starter. The only reason he wouldn’t play is because the university was punishing him and/or retaliating against him for taking them to court.
Click to expand...
Next thing you know we'll have players (or parents of players) suing the coaches due to lack of playing time because "participation in sports is vital to the development of [their] career." DGL's mom will be the first.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cjcollie and boilermaker75
Smokestack91 said:
Next thing you know we'll have players (or parents of players) suing the coaches due to lack of playing time because "participation in sports is vital to the development of [their] career." DGL's mom will be the first.
Click to expand...
If Illinois didn't follow proper due process in their determination based on their own rules, as it appears the judge says happened here, then I'm fine with this result.

If they don't want him to play, they need to do their own DP procedures and they can remove him, but you can't ignore even your own procedures and not expect someone to take that to court.

I know what happened because I've seen it happen as a defense attorney in the military with a particularly poor prosecutor. Someone gets arrested somewhere for something. Folks think ah well, he was arrested, I don't have to do anything else on my end. I don't need to engage my own system under my own rules.
 
qazplm said:
If Illinois didn't follow proper due process in their determination based on their own rules, as it appears the judge says happened here, then I'm fine with this result.

If they don't want him to play, they need to do their own DP procedures and they can remove him, but you can't ignore even your own procedures and not expect someone to take that to court.

I know what happened because I've seen it happen as a defense attorney in the military with a particularly poor prosecutor. Someone gets arrested somewhere for something. Folks think ah well, he was arrested, I don't have to do anything else on my end. I don't need to engage my own system under my own rules.
Click to expand...
were you a JAG?
 
KenTre1983 said:
“Plaintiff’s participation in sports is vital to the development of his career as well as his current and future economic opportunities considering plaintiff’s intention to declare for the 2024 NBA Draft,” Lawless wrote in the order issued Friday. “Prior to his suspension, plaintiff was projected to be a lottery pick in the NBA. His participation in future games impact his prospects in the draft and his earning potential.

The obligations of Defendants pursuant to this Order are to be construed as broadly as possible.”

And, Underwood will play him going forward.

I’ll stand by my interpretation of the injunction. No way they could sit him, absent going through whatever process the university has and re-suspending him, without finding themselves back in court. He was a starter. The only reason he wouldn’t play is because the university was punishing him and/or retaliating against him for taking them to court.
Click to expand...
And your interpretation continues to be wrong. And let me be clear to the rest reading this, I am not saying that the coach can say "I think the judge was wrong so I ain't playing him." But if the coach wanted to say, I'm going to work him back into the lineup, or I want to spread my time around differently since we've adjusted to him not being here, or any other rational team based reason, the judge isn't getting involved with that. He doesn't have to start Shannon, and he doesn't have to play him some mythical number of minutes. And if he ain't playing well, he can bench him.

He has the same freedom as a coach to play any player any minutes that he had before this whole stuff started. Odds are, since he likely wasn't involved in the decision to not have him play, he's going to play him the normal amount of minutes. But what's not going to happen is the coach thinks for whatever reason that Shannon is going to be a detriment to the team by playing x number minutes that he's going to feel the judge has tied his hands, because the judge hasn't tied his hands. The judge tied the university's hands in suspending him without appropriate due process.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: northside100 and PUQBMan.
Roeder said:
Do they have to go @ Maryland? BTN might have to do that one on mute if so...
Click to expand...

Illinois is @ Maryland on February 17. Shannon did not start today against Rutgers but has entered the game.....Illini are ahead 8-4 early in Champaign-Urbana.

Rob Hummel on the call with Brandon Gaudin again after the trip to Iowa City.
 
Curious, what kind of a reception did the Illini faithful greet Shannon with when he entered the game. I missed it.
 
DrEss said:
Curious, what kind of a reception did the Illini faithful greet Shannon with when he entered the game. I missed it.
Click to expand...
A very loud and long standing ovation. Considering the evidence in this case so far appears non-existent, the vast majority of Illini fans feel sorry for Terrence, believe he is innocent and support him. And if you believe someone is innocent, you are not going to treat that person like he is guilty … especially when he is still innocent in the eyes of the law. So not surprising.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: all4theillini and Heads up BOILER
Fighter of the Nightman said:
A very loud and long standing ovation. Considering the evidence in this case so far appears non-existent, the vast majority of Illini fans feel sorry for Terrence, believe he is innocent and support him. And if you believe someone is innocent, you are not going to treat that person like he is guilty … especially when he is still innocent in the eyes of the law. So not surprising.
Click to expand...

Come out and got, not points for himself, but in the first possessions had 2 assists. Good way to get back into it. Hope he is back still when we play Illinois. Tougher, yes. But also better competition that could really test Purdue to their limits.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roeder
Fighter of the Nightman said:
A very loud and long standing ovation. Considering the evidence in this case so far appears non-existent, the vast majority of Illini fans feel sorry for Terrence, believe he is innocent and support him. And if you believe someone is innocent, you are not going to treat that person like he is guilty … especially when he is still innocent in the eyes of the law. So not surprising.
Click to expand...

Yes, police departments and county/city prosecutors love bringing charges against individuals with little to no evidence.

It has nothing to do with innocence or guilt for playing basketball. If this was a civil case I'd say let him play, but it's not. Not surprised in the least you are defending him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: z_one
Fighter of the Nightman said:
A very loud and long standing ovation. Considering the evidence in this case so far appears non-existent, the vast majority of Illini fans feel sorry for Terrence, believe he is innocent and support him. And if you believe someone is innocent, you are not going to treat that person like he is guilty … especially when he is still innocent in the eyes of the law. So not surprising.
Click to expand...
Do you have a link showing there's little to no evidence? Because I haven't seen anything one way or the other.
 
  • Like
Reactions: northside100
Hausta01 said:
Yes, police departments and county/city prosecutors love bringing charges against individuals with little to no evidence.

It has nothing to do with innocence or guilt for playing basketball. If this was a civil case I'd say let him play, but it's not. Not surprised in the least you are defending him.
Click to expand...
Depends on the police. I'd agree more with prosecutors as they generally only take the strongest sex assault cases but that's not a truism either.
 
qazplm said:
Do you have a link showing there's little to no evidence? Because I haven't seen anything one way or the other.
Click to expand...
Here is the only thing I have seen. This isn’t the evidence the DA/police have but the sworn affidavit. Make of it what you will.
 
ChoiceBeef said:
Here is the only thing I have seen. This isn’t the evidence the DA/police have but the sworn affidavit. Make of it what you will.
View embedded media
Click to expand...
I mean I've seen a lot of alleged victim affidavits. Points in her favor:

1. She reported it within 24 hours. That's pretty rare and usually a pretty strong point in favor of credibility. Including subjecting herself to an exam.
2. She went through a lot of faces before she settled on Shannon. That means she wasn't looking for the first Black dude she could find. Also cuts against the idea that she struggled with cross-racial facial identification if she was of another race, which is a legit issue.
3. There appear to be witnesses at least to the before and after part that can either corroborate or dispute her version of events, including a contemporaneous allegation. But at the very least, her phone puts her where she says she was, and her friend corroborates at least the before and after parts.
4. She doesn't claim she was drunk or drugged, and she doesn't claim the encounter lasted for very long at all.
5. As of yet, no reason to believe she had any idea who he was, that he was "famous" or that she would otherwise gain from a false report. (Of course, new info could change that).

Is it enough for conviction on its own? I mean sure, but that would depend on a jury deciding she was credible in her story. People think you can't be convicted just on a claim. Well sure you can, if the jury believes the person making the claim. But obviously there may be other things out there we don't know that will add or subtract from her claim.

But bottom line, I have no problem with an arrest based on what I saw there. There's absolutely probable cause.
 
  • Like
Reactions: northside100, Chi-Boiler and z_one
qazplm said:
Depends on the police. I'd agree more with prosecutors as they generally only take the strongest sex assault cases but that's not a truism either.
Click to expand...
I have read the Kansas DA who charged him is 0-7 in rape cases, so either the evidence is not the strongest or she is very bad at her job.
 
I just watched a podcast with Gary Parrish with CBS sports about the Illini/Shannon situation. I actually think he’s pretty spot on on the issue. Shannon should not be playing as the situation that led to his suspension did not change. The civil suit leading to the restraining order doesn’t change the reason he was suspended, and certainly doesn’t require him to be given playing time! Innocent until proven guilty is applicable to jail time but doesn’t affect the rules of a school that is related toward the ability to take part in a sport…that is a privilege. Parrish’s statement that the suspension was not harming his draft stock or potential professional career but rather the fact that he was charged with sexual assault that hurts his standing!
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: northside100 and tjreese
Boiler Buck said:
Come out and got, not points for himself, but in the first possessions had 2 assists. Good way to get back into it. Hope he is back still when we play Illinois. Tougher, yes. But also better competition that could really test Purdue to their limits.
Click to expand...
It should be a very tough game for Purdue. Purdue will need to be careful in turning it over or taking bad shots. Purdue will want Shannon playing in half court, not in transition. There is only one ball and so what Shannon gets is less for Domask. The improvement in scoring is NOT additive I don't believe.

They will be better potentially than at Mackey, but you never know how the ball bounces. Purdue will need solid play out of Fletcher because there is an additional player that is a physical load. Also, Guerrier is a handful. Good post feeds and Zach playing well will be more important in this game than some others I expect due to not turning it over and starting Illinois transition as well as Zach getting going early and possibly putting Illinois in a bit of foul trouble on the five man. Course they know that and may load up on Zach requiring Purdue to shoot the 3 ball.

If I'm the opposition I probably give up the three ball and try to stop Zach. Zach probably scores at a 60% Fg attempt, draws fouls and removes pieces. If the game is in the final minute and Zach "is on" he makes 60% and the 3 ball only makes 40% and if one or two points work and don't need the 3 then it is 60% versus 40% of success for Zach.

Control of the game will be huge. Perimeter shooting will be huge. Shell defense will be huge in containing the dribble, but yet must be able to recover to designated perimeter shooters. Should be an outstanding game...and as always winning the possession battle by a good margin will be important. Just hope the good guys pull it out. I think Illinois can be more sporadic playing very well or not very well whereas Purdue will be good always...part of Zach's consistency as a go to when everything else is struggling he is still an outlet.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Zaphod_B, DwaynePurvis00 and Boiler Buck
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GemstateBoiler

Ballo to Indiana

Replies
167
Views
8K
Boilermaker Men's Basketball
Boiler Buck
Boiler Buck
GemstateBoiler

Arizona's Ballo to Portal

Replies
9
Views
883
Boilermaker Men's Basketball
PaBoiler78
P
G

Predictions from Media

Replies
11
Views
2K
Boilermaker Men's Basketball
qazplm
qazplm
boilerman101

OT: Shannon taking Illinois to court.

Replies
19
Views
1K
Boilermaker Men's Basketball
Heads up BOILER
H
G

Woody coming back according to ESPN

Replies
16
Views
2K
Boilermaker Men's Basketball
TopicTalk
TopicTalk
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back