Started By
Message
re: Newton Eligibility Ruling Question
Posted on 12/3/10 at 10:12 am to PuntBamaPunt
Posted on 12/3/10 at 10:12 am to PuntBamaPunt
Fair question. I am guessing AU's position will be that they did an initial investigation and beleived Cam to be eligible. After new information was learned and their investigation was completed (on Monday :winkwink:) they consulted the conference and the NCAA and determined a rules violation had occurred. They declared him ineligible and immediately requested reinstatement. Obviously there was a lot of communication going on between AU, the SEC and the NCAA behind the scenes and the timing of this ruling and announcement was orchestrated.
This post was edited on 12/3/10 at 10:15 am
2
Posted on 12/3/10 at 3:07 pm to WDE24
I have two Newton Eligibility questions that may be easy for those who understand the rules better than I...
1. Cam Newton was found to be ineligible by Auburn for deeds committed whilst he was shopping for schools a year ago. The school declared him ineligible this week (for 24 hrs)... but doesn't his ineligible status start from when the "crime" was committed, not from when it was discovered (or no longer undeniable)? Wouldn't that mean Cam was ineligible from the start of the season until the NCAA declared him eligible on Wednesday? Wouldn't that mean none of Auburn's wins count (except for tomorrow, presumably) since they played with an ineligible player?
2. How is Cam academically eligible? He was at florida and was about to be expelled for academic fraud, then skipped town. He never answered (as far as I know) to those charges. Is there a 1 year grace period that wipes away all academic improprieties (i.e., why he went to communitiy college for a year)?
Thanks.
BTW Not an Auburn hater (any more than anyone else from outside Auburn!), although I do enjoy schadenfreude...
1. Cam Newton was found to be ineligible by Auburn for deeds committed whilst he was shopping for schools a year ago. The school declared him ineligible this week (for 24 hrs)... but doesn't his ineligible status start from when the "crime" was committed, not from when it was discovered (or no longer undeniable)? Wouldn't that mean Cam was ineligible from the start of the season until the NCAA declared him eligible on Wednesday? Wouldn't that mean none of Auburn's wins count (except for tomorrow, presumably) since they played with an ineligible player?
2. How is Cam academically eligible? He was at florida and was about to be expelled for academic fraud, then skipped town. He never answered (as far as I know) to those charges. Is there a 1 year grace period that wipes away all academic improprieties (i.e., why he went to communitiy college for a year)?
Thanks.
BTW Not an Auburn hater (any more than anyone else from outside Auburn!), although I do enjoy schadenfreude...
Posted on 12/3/10 at 5:17 pm to WDE24
WDE24
I believe if you look at the Auburn response to the questions about Cam Newton when this went public, it was: "Cam Newton is an eligible athlete at Auburn University". It has been the Auburn position that anything that happened with MSU compromised his eligibilty at MSU, not at Auburn.
You raise the same questions that I did about the NCAA statement on Wednesday. Cam Newton's "amateur status" was violated resulting in a violation NCAA rules. Okay so what does it mean relative to the schools involved? MSU, Auburn, both, neither, what? It seems like it is purposefully "vague". If a violation occured that made him ineligible at MSU, then why was Auburn made to make ineligible and file for reinstatement? I heard a former NCAA investigator asking the same question on Finebaum.
The only thing I can come up with is, at some point, his eligibility had to be compromised at Auburn. In July (when Slive and SEC office contacted Auburn) or at some point later?
This is pure speculation on my part but I keep going back to Nov. 11 prior to the Georgia game when Cam, his parents, NCAA Investigators, and members of the Auburn Athletic and Compliance departments met. It was widely report after that meeting that Auburn was informed by the NCAA that they are playing Cam "at their own risk". I believe that Auburn may have accepted the "liabilty" of Cam's ineligibilty at that point. That meeting could very well been enough for the NCAA to say "this could be problem, you might want to sit him until it is sorted out".
This is when everything went quiet and everyone stopped talking. The standard response until the ruling this week remained "Cam Newton is an eligible athlete at Auburn University".
The people with NCAA and SEC remind me of what my Dad use to say about politicians: "They can kiss a baby, smoke a cigar, and talk out of both sides of their mouth all at the same time."
I believe if you look at the Auburn response to the questions about Cam Newton when this went public, it was: "Cam Newton is an eligible athlete at Auburn University". It has been the Auburn position that anything that happened with MSU compromised his eligibilty at MSU, not at Auburn.
You raise the same questions that I did about the NCAA statement on Wednesday. Cam Newton's "amateur status" was violated resulting in a violation NCAA rules. Okay so what does it mean relative to the schools involved? MSU, Auburn, both, neither, what? It seems like it is purposefully "vague". If a violation occured that made him ineligible at MSU, then why was Auburn made to make ineligible and file for reinstatement? I heard a former NCAA investigator asking the same question on Finebaum.
The only thing I can come up with is, at some point, his eligibility had to be compromised at Auburn. In July (when Slive and SEC office contacted Auburn) or at some point later?
This is pure speculation on my part but I keep going back to Nov. 11 prior to the Georgia game when Cam, his parents, NCAA Investigators, and members of the Auburn Athletic and Compliance departments met. It was widely report after that meeting that Auburn was informed by the NCAA that they are playing Cam "at their own risk". I believe that Auburn may have accepted the "liabilty" of Cam's ineligibilty at that point. That meeting could very well been enough for the NCAA to say "this could be problem, you might want to sit him until it is sorted out".
This is when everything went quiet and everyone stopped talking. The standard response until the ruling this week remained "Cam Newton is an eligible athlete at Auburn University".
The people with NCAA and SEC remind me of what my Dad use to say about politicians: "They can kiss a baby, smoke a cigar, and talk out of both sides of their mouth all at the same time."
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News