re: This is no longer about Auburn, it is about the next university...

quote:

---

The point is that it won't affect Cam in any way one way or the other. So Auburn has to vacate some wins. Big deal. So they're on probation for the next century. Who gives a frick? Cam is off making money in the NFL and he couldn't be fricking bothered.

---

I think we can all agree on that point. Where I disagreed with the OP was that it will open the floodgates to pay players either from the schools directly or from big money boosters fo the schools. I think that as long as the institutions can be held responsible and punished, that will continue to be a big enough deterrent to keep it from expanding.

I admit that most, if not all major programs (and a lot of smaller ones) have boosters sliding some cash toward their big name players, hell a guy I graduated HS with in the mid 90s was supposeldy offered a couple of thousand a month and a car to come play at MTSU (he chose the MLB draft instead). However, the threat of major sanctions against the program should keep this from mushrooming on that side of the equation because nothing in the ruling today changes that, because whether or not the father is an extension of the athlete (I don't think that is spelled out in NCAA rules) I think we can agree that by NCAA rule (printed, non-arguable) tha a booster is an extension of the institution.