Started By
Message
Slive Interview - 104.5 Nashville
Posted on 11/19/10 at 1:07 pm
Posted on 11/19/10 at 1:07 pm
Commish Slive gave interview as it related to the SEC suspension handed down to Bruce Pearl. He stressed this is an SEC suspension, and is totally exclusive from any action or information arising from the current NCAA investigation.
Indicated the rules and regulations of the SEC were modified this past Spring granting the Commissioner the ability to suspend a member or employee of a member if, based on SEC review, the member violated rules of performance standards. Said in this particular case, the 8 game suspension is 1/2 of the SEC games for Tenn. this season.
He specifically referenced the Cam Newton case, and the lack of established facts regarding the situation at Auburn. He kind of defined established facts as information where both the SEC and the School are in agreement. He described teh timeline of events as
1) SEC sent letter to Tenn. with allegations, supported in this case by Pearl's own admission to both the SEC and Press. The letter asked for a response to the allegations
2) Tenn responded to the Commissioner's letter
3) SEC reviewed Tenn's response, and set sanction
He said this is the 1st time a suspension like this has occurred, given the short duration between the suspension and the establishment of the rule.
This, explains the lack of sanctions on the part of the SEC as it relates to Auburn and Cam. Which, leads to the conclusion unless a ton of admissions are made on the part of both the Newton as well as Auburn camps, Cam will play in Bryant - Denny this year, as far as the SEC is concerned.
Totally exclusive from the NCAA
Indicated the rules and regulations of the SEC were modified this past Spring granting the Commissioner the ability to suspend a member or employee of a member if, based on SEC review, the member violated rules of performance standards. Said in this particular case, the 8 game suspension is 1/2 of the SEC games for Tenn. this season.
He specifically referenced the Cam Newton case, and the lack of established facts regarding the situation at Auburn. He kind of defined established facts as information where both the SEC and the School are in agreement. He described teh timeline of events as
1) SEC sent letter to Tenn. with allegations, supported in this case by Pearl's own admission to both the SEC and Press. The letter asked for a response to the allegations
2) Tenn responded to the Commissioner's letter
3) SEC reviewed Tenn's response, and set sanction
He said this is the 1st time a suspension like this has occurred, given the short duration between the suspension and the establishment of the rule.
This, explains the lack of sanctions on the part of the SEC as it relates to Auburn and Cam. Which, leads to the conclusion unless a ton of admissions are made on the part of both the Newton as well as Auburn camps, Cam will play in Bryant - Denny this year, as far as the SEC is concerned.
Totally exclusive from the NCAA
6
Posted on 11/19/10 at 1:17 pm to blueTunaTiger
So basically he's saying even though they may have evidence to the contrary, unless the offending school "agrees" with it, its not an established fact. Hummmm-too bad that doesn't count in a court of law!!! "Ah yeah your honor, the witnesses said I did it but I don't agree, so you have to let me go". Is there an "established fact definition in the by-laws? I guess an admission by Cecil about a discussion of money at MSU isn't an established fact because "Auburn doesn't agree with it? Well, he admitted it, and its deosn't matter if Auburn agrees or disagrees, I'm sure MSU would be in agreement with it because THE ATHLETIC DIRECTOR STATED A REQUEST FOR AN EXTRA BENEFIT WAS ASKED FOR!!!
So I guess the SEC is not agreeing to the statements!!!
So I guess the SEC is not agreeing to the statements!!!
This post was edited on 11/19/10 at 1:23 pm
Posted on 11/19/10 at 1:18 pm to blueTunaTiger
Did the SEC send a letter to Auburn? If so was there a response? I don't see how the Pearl situation even comes close to what is going on with Camgate. JMO
Posted on 11/19/10 at 1:19 pm to blueTunaTiger
Clay Travis is tweeting out what Slive is saying here:
LINK
LINK
quote:
@ClayTravisBGID
As compared to Cam Newton, the SEC has no "established facts" as of yet on the Cam Newton case. Hence Slive cannot act.
quote:
@ClayTravisBGID
He also tells us that the league suspension was in concert with UT and relied on "established facts."
quote:
@ClayTravisBGID
Commissioner Slive tells us the Pearl suspension is a first for the SEC. Watch out rest of league.
This post was edited on 11/19/10 at 1:21 pm
Posted on 11/19/10 at 1:20 pm to blueTunaTiger
Rather interesting. I like the fact the suspension in during SEC play. I feel like that is when he's most valuable to the team. I was just thinking of this the other day. When a player gets suspended in NCAAB they should suspend them during conference play not at the beginning of the season when they play scrubs.
I was also wondering why they investigated and suspended Pearl when earlier the SEC said some stuff like they are not an investigative body. This statement clears up how they come to the suspension. Basically an admission of guilt.
Good info.
I was also wondering why they investigated and suspended Pearl when earlier the SEC said some stuff like they are not an investigative body. This statement clears up how they come to the suspension. Basically an admission of guilt.
Good info.
This post was edited on 11/19/10 at 1:22 pm
Posted on 11/19/10 at 1:22 pm to blueTunaTiger
quote:
He specifically referenced the Cam Newton case, and the lack of established facts regarding the situation at Auburn. He kind of defined established facts as information where both the SEC and the School are in agreement.
So if Cecil Newton is caught on tape setting up a pay for play scheme and Auburn just says "we think that is a different Cecil Newton" the SEC would not consider it an established fact that Cecil Newton was shopping his son?
Posted on 11/19/10 at 1:23 pm to blueTunaTiger
quote:
He specifically referenced the Cam Newton case, and the lack of established facts regarding the situation at Auburn.
So far, this has been a GREAT day for Auburn. They should be jubilant. Both Slive and Emmert are now on the records saying they don't have enough established facts. Of course, the rest of us would read that as the NCAA working feverishly to gather all the evidence and facts they can. But Auburn can definitely spin this as a huge positive and they will...
Posted on 11/19/10 at 1:24 pm to pdxlsufan
Am I wrong!
My take is that the point of the post is that the SEC does now have more teeth in sactions department but that Auburn in the Camgate thing still must agree. So that means that just because Cam is still playing in "no way" means there is smoke but no fire.
My take is that the point of the post is that the SEC does now have more teeth in sactions department but that Auburn in the Camgate thing still must agree. So that means that just because Cam is still playing in "no way" means there is smoke but no fire.
Posted on 11/19/10 at 1:28 pm to Robot Santa
quote:Yep
So if Cecil Newton is caught on tape setting up a pay for play scheme and Auburn just says "we think that is a different Cecil Newton" the SEC would not consider it an established fact that Cecil Newton was shopping his son?
Posted on 11/19/10 at 1:32 pm to Robot Santa
quote:
the SEC would not consider it an established fact that Cecil Newton was shopping his son?
What I gathered he was saying is the facts substantiating the suspension of Pearl handed down by the SEC were not in dispute. Two distinct differences than what is going on with Cam Newton. (1) What are the "established" facts, and (2) at this time, do both the SEC and Auburn agree that they are in fact "established." All Auburn has to do is provide transcripts of interviews given by Cecil regarding what he did and did not do with MSU, and it would delay any suspension being rendered.
Posted on 11/19/10 at 1:32 pm to Coach in Waiting
Slive just sounds slimy to me.
Posted on 11/19/10 at 1:32 pm to omegaman66
quote:
So that means that just because Cam is still playing in "no way" means there is smoke but no fire.
It means it's likely there's a fire, but all the SEC and the NCAA have right now is a lot of smoke and maybe some kindling but not enough evidence to persuasively link the fire to either the Newtons or Auburn.
And the SEC and the NCAA won't act against Newton or Auburn until they have enough facts established. Emmert and Slive have both told us today that they clearly do NOT have enough facts... YET.
Posted on 11/19/10 at 1:33 pm to Coach in Waiting
I don't think anything definitive will come down before the season ends. I fully expect that Cam will play the remainder of the season and Auburn will more than likely win out and play for the BCS championship. If there does not seem to be enough evidence to sit him now, I don't really think anything additional will be forthcoming until well after the season ends.
Posted on 11/19/10 at 1:34 pm to Robot Santa
quote:
the SEC would not consider it an established fact that Cecil Newton was shopping his son?
A WSB article from a "source" doesn't make it an established fact.
And we don't know that Bell's tapes do or don't implicate Cecil...
Posted on 11/19/10 at 1:41 pm to pdxlsufan
Slive is a part of the problem. He thinks he is helping the SEC, but he is hurting the entire league with his cover up lack of leadership.
For years to come we will look at the SEC record books and it will say no SEC Football Champion for 2010. What a joke.
For years to come we will look at the SEC record books and it will say no SEC Football Champion for 2010. What a joke.
Posted on 11/19/10 at 1:45 pm to bayoubreeze
With all that is going on, does everyone think that if AU has a loss the voters drop them like a hot rock?
This post was edited on 11/19/10 at 1:46 pm
Posted on 11/19/10 at 1:52 pm to bayoubreeze
I think the point with respect to established evidence Slive was making here is NOT that both school and SEC are required to be in agreement, but rather that there has to be established evidence - i.e. deposition of admitted guilt from whoever, a conviction, tapes, photographs. What he was saying in the interview was because both parties AGREED with the evidence, they both establish it to be fact.
If, at the end of the day the SEC gets a packet from the NCAA with tapes, photos, depositions, transcripts, indictments or whatever, Auburn could dispute the packet, but it would still be "established"
Everyone is gathering information at the time regarding CAM, and it may very well lead to suspension. But, at this time, nothing has been "established" Put another way, it's going to take time.
If, at the end of the day the SEC gets a packet from the NCAA with tapes, photos, depositions, transcripts, indictments or whatever, Auburn could dispute the packet, but it would still be "established"
Everyone is gathering information at the time regarding CAM, and it may very well lead to suspension. But, at this time, nothing has been "established" Put another way, it's going to take time.
Posted on 11/19/10 at 3:23 pm to D500MAG
quote:
Slive is a part of the problem. He thinks he is helping the SEC, but he is hurting the entire league with his cover up lack of leadership.
One would think that the presidents of the university's that make up the SEC would be applying a shite load of pressure on Slive to get this done. They are his bosses. Hope they fire his arse soon.
Posted on 11/19/10 at 3:54 pm to bayoubreeze
quote:
For years to come we will look at the SEC record books and it will say no SEC Football Champion for 2010.
Or maybe it will say "South Carolina Gamecocks" for 2010.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News