Sadly, this is not a repeat. Mr. CBI himself is back on the internets, taking pictures with large sums of cash for some reason, and as Pants Pal Eric Page puts it, "that ain't Pell Grant money." Observe:

Fat stacks on his face...

...on his head...

...and in his mouth. Okay then.

It's probably safe to say that he's not particularly interested in playing football ever again, because he has better things to do, like... wear his money like a hat (but he already has a hat on. Oh, I quit.)

That lunacy aside, there's actually something worth noting in the article: the strange tale of Abe Satterfield. He was a lightly recruited kid from Erie, only two stars, but he was offered early enough that the coaching staff must have seen something they liked. He saw light playing time as a true freshman, usually on special teams, and was suspended indefinitely with Cedric Everson before the Michigan State team. Later, he was named by the Des Moines Register as one of three players that police investigated in the sexual assault case. Of the three, Everson and Satterfield both transferred after the semester, and you kind of know how we feel about Jevon Pugh, the third implicated student-athlete, already.

So, according to the article, Satterfield found his way to Indiana University of Pennylvania (which, somehow, is located in the mountains of Nepal). The coach there, former Illinois whipping boy leader Lou Tepper, had this to say about Satterfield:

"I said, 'Would you take him back if you could?' Tepper told the Indiana Gazette. "And they said, 'Absolutely.' They told me that he might have started for them next year at corner. They were all high on him. He seems like a great kid."

Page then muses:

Hmmm... what does that tell you about Satterfield’s decision to transfer, which I think we all assumed at the time was strongly encouraged if not demanded by the coaching staff? The fact that Tepper asked, "Would you take him back if you could?" and they said, "Absolutely"... that either means the decision to leave was totally Satterfield’s or that his dismissal was based on public perception. Did the coaching staff want to keep Satterfield around but couldn’t because his name had been mentioned in the same sentence as rape and with the year they’ve had it would have been a PR nightmare? Or did Satterfield leave town because he had already been found guilty in the court of public opinion? It’s interesting...

All plausible scenarios, to be sure. Let me throw this out there, too--we don't know why they couldn't take Satterfield back. For one, it's probably better that such information wasn't made public, just for the kid's sake. Nobody's been charged with anything, after all. But in light of the fact that he and Everson were both suspended immediately and effectively permanently, don't you think it's possible that Iowa couldn't take Satterfield back because of his misconduct? That although there wasn't enough evidence to charge him with sexual assault, the coaching staff knew that he had screwed up badly enough that team rules dictated that he'd be off the team? Also, isn't it wholly plausible that Ferentz wasn't being completely truthful with Tepper? It'd be an awfully dick move to tell the kid's new coach, "fuck no we don't want him back, good luck, peace." Satterfield and Everson are off the team and off campus (Everson transferred to Alcorn State), so that's essentially the end of what Kirk Ferentz needs to worry about, right? Why kick them when they're down?

Anyway. Good that they're neither here nor in prison. And I sincerely hope that this is the last time we ever hear bad news about them. There's no behavior that's more abhorrent or appalling than violence against women, but these two have a second chance, one most don't get, to start acting like real men. We sincerely hope they take it. As for Dominique... well, that deferred judgment's probably going to get un-deferred in the near future. That's a shame.