Despite the loss still a great day!

[TheSultan]

But that was him personally. This time he exposed his potential student athletes to prostitution, imo, a totally different can of worms that most parents could never find tolerable.

Ah OK. I thought you were referencing his affair.

[Gato78]

JS Online scrubbed the Bo article from its page. What?

[Hamostradamus]

It doesn't appear on the page, but if you enter "Bo Ryan" in the js search bar, this comes up:

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/natio...371174041.html

Interesting, it is far smaller than the last one and the byline is now AP, not Potrykus. Hmmmmm.....

[IWB]

The JS automatically has a AP feed, so they probably couldn't have bounced the AP story.

Amazing that they entire Milwaukee media attacks MU for players being in a bar underage, but scraps a national story to protect Bo/UW.

[IWB]

Obviously you can't be sure what's true and what isn't at this point, but it was on these boards about the massage therapist several months ago and that turned out to be true. We also heard that two other women were department employees, including Tara Selah.

Point is, why do the UW releases make a point that the woman was "not a department employee"? Its a press release, so they weren't asked, so why would they feel the need to specify that in the release? Because they want to get this one out there to try and kill it before it gets a lot worse, which it may.

[MayorBeluga]

Obviously you can't be sure what's true and what isn't at this point, but it was on these boards about the massage therapist several months ago and that turned out to be true. We also heard that two other women were department employees, including Tara Selah.

Point is, why do the UW releases make a point that the woman was "not a department employee"? Its a press release, so they weren't asked, so why would they feel the need to specify that in the release? Because they want to get this one out there to try and kill it before it gets a lot worse, which it may.

Because technically they are correct: THIS woman was not a department employee.

[Gato78]

I think from the investigator's standpoint, it was important to note it was not an investigation into workplace discrimination.