Started By
Message

re: ScAUbinsky: Past Time for Bond and Bell to put up or shut up

Posted on 2/28/11 at 2:02 pm to
Posted by WDE24
Member since Oct 2010
54185 posts
Posted on 2/28/11 at 2:02 pm to
quote:

My point is that the NCAA clearly didn't do a proper investigation before and relied heavily on Auburn's assumption of innocence. That they reinstated a player, that was still under investigation is contrary to every decision they've ever made concerning eligibility.
That has nothing to do with anything I have posted.

All I have said is they didn't rely exclusively on info provided by AU. Also, I have stated that the reinstatement shows that, if the NCAA in fact heard the types prior to the decision (as is claimed), then the tapes obviously aren't as conclusive regarding Cam's knowledge as they are being portrayed.

Nothing more, nothing less.

ETA: FIY, Emmert in interview with ESPN_

quote:

I was very pleased with how that whole issue was handled. Our staff and enforcement did a great investigation, did it quickly and got to the facts as best we could find them…The fact of the matter is, as we got to the facts that we could uncover, they led to the right conclusion and it was that there is no evidence there was anything inappropriate with this young man and with that institution had occurred…The burden of proof for the NCAA is a little deeper than the burden of proof for a blogger.
This post was edited on 2/28/11 at 2:05 pm
Posted by Alahunter
Member since Jan 2008
90739 posts
Posted on 2/28/11 at 2:05 pm to
quote:

All I have said is they didn't rely exclusively on info provided by AU. Also, I have stated that the reinstatement shows that, if the NCAA in fact heard the types prior to the decision (as is claimed) then the tapes obviously aren't as conclusive regarding Cam's knowledge as they are being portrayed.

Nothing more, nothing less.


Again, that's to be determined. The enforcement staff is separate from the eligibility staff. With less than 24 hrs to decide eligibility, it's reasonable to believe they couldn't have gathered the information that the investigation had at the time. There just isn't enough time to properly review a case, especially, if there were "months" of investigations beforehand. It's much more believable to think they based their decision on the information provided to them from Auburn.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter