Started By
Message
re: Emmert on Bruce Pearl and Cam Newton in USAToday
Posted on 12/16/10 at 10:27 am to bama my heart
Posted on 12/16/10 at 10:27 am to bama my heart
Probably not. My understanding is that they are investigating to see if they can uncover or link any evidence to rules currently on the books, be it Cam or someone else, and that new legislation will make it easier to deem players ineligible in the future who may be shopped to schools.
0
Posted on 12/16/10 at 10:28 am to Crede15
quote:
Another question for him about Pearl would have been why Dez Bryant was suspended for the year for lying to the NCAA while Pearl hasn't been suspended for the year for lying to the NCAA. Bryant didn't even lie about a violation, unlike Pearl.
The NCAA hasn't ruled on the Bruce Pearl case yet.
They very well could suspend Pearl for a year.
So that would mean, for lying about having a BBQ at his house.
Pearl is suspended for 1 year and 8 games, fined 1.5 million dollars, and suspended from recruiting for an entire year.
Would that punishment really match the crime?
Posted on 12/16/10 at 10:30 am to memphisplaya
quote:
Point is people are ready to thrash the NCAA , but if they give a ruling based on little sufficient evidence
Isn't this the SAME organization that will rule a recruit INELIGIBLE if his GPA or ACT score goes up more than a preset number of points?
Aren't they, in those cases, presupposing that shenanigans occurred without any evidence of the fact? They, in effect, are saying "you did too well on your ACT retake. There may have been some cheating....so you may NOT enroll and practice at your school of choice."
No factual evidence. Just a preponderance of evidence. I call hypocrisy.
Posted on 12/16/10 at 10:33 am to Tennessee Jed
FWIW Gary Parrish said on his show yesterday (he was in Indianpolis with Emmert on Tuesday)
That there is no doubt in his mind the NCAA is going to hammer Pearl.
Said the NCAA has done crazier things than let UT off, and they're an awful organization that never follows precedence. So you never really know what they're going to do.
But if he had to bet on it, Pearl is going to get hit with a year suspension. Said UT will probably take it, and use Tony Jones in the interim. And Pearl will be back in 2012.
Also said that the NCAA has failed to do anything in cases far worse than Pearl's where they had facts.
Mentioned Cory Maggette getting paid at Duke as example number 1.
That there is no doubt in his mind the NCAA is going to hammer Pearl.
Said the NCAA has done crazier things than let UT off, and they're an awful organization that never follows precedence. So you never really know what they're going to do.
But if he had to bet on it, Pearl is going to get hit with a year suspension. Said UT will probably take it, and use Tony Jones in the interim. And Pearl will be back in 2012.
Also said that the NCAA has failed to do anything in cases far worse than Pearl's where they had facts.
Mentioned Cory Maggette getting paid at Duke as example number 1.
This post was edited on 12/16/10 at 10:43 am
Posted on 12/16/10 at 10:37 am to wahoocs
quote:
I'm fine as a fan to allow things to play out. But, I'm insulted and embarrassed to find out the SEC sat on this, and once they reluctantly had to deal with it, the NCAA asked me to believe a kid with his resume of integrity and character, knew nothing about his father's actions, after stating in published articles that he left his decision up to his father.
You obviously do not understand the NCAA's powers.
Posted on 12/16/10 at 10:41 am to BlackHelicopterPilot
I think that there are 2 things at play... first is if something is written as a rule on the books, and the leeway they use in attaching evidence to the rule. Typically, there hasn't been much pushback in these instances, due in part to the fact that the NCAA isn't a rule of law.
The second is if there is evidence, but it doesn't fit a rule already on the books. With Masoli, they tried to get around this by saying the rule in place was not meant to allow players to circumnavigate punishment at other schools. This was not written specifically in the books, and was thus overturned. Cam was going to fall in this category.
The second is if there is evidence, but it doesn't fit a rule already on the books. With Masoli, they tried to get around this by saying the rule in place was not meant to allow players to circumnavigate punishment at other schools. This was not written specifically in the books, and was thus overturned. Cam was going to fall in this category.
Posted on 12/16/10 at 10:50 am to memphisplaya
memphy, I <3 you but
Two words - Alfy Hill
quote:
Point is people are ready to thrash the NCAA , but if they give a ruling based on little sufficient evidence
Two words - Alfy Hill
Posted on 12/16/10 at 11:01 am to BamaChick
The fact that Alfy Hill was Alfy Hilled, and Cam Newton is grinning like the Cheshire Cat (calico version), makes me ill.
Posted on 12/16/10 at 11:18 am to wahoocs
I see how the SEC stood to lose a lot. But in the interview with MArk Emmert, we learn that the NCAA's cash cow is the NCAA Hoops Tourney, and they make only a pittance (less than 1 million off the BCSCG)regardless of who plays. However, Emmert has ties to the SEC who would has lost big time without it's usual two teams (AU is BCSCG and Arky in Sugar) in the game. I think the NCAA was looking, but did't want to find anything too early. They have time to look harder from here on out. After the game is over, the SEC will get it's funds, Auburn and even other SEC schools (?UF)could be potentially punished, even severely, but no money will be refunded from the SEC and its members. That is the safe play for the NCAA which would lose every shred of limited cred it has if it slammed Cam and/or Auburm and couldn't back it up later.
Posted on 12/16/10 at 11:38 am to BoudreauxinGA
quote:
the ncaa is trying to cash in on a big NC game. auburn going down would have been a big hit for them. thats why they cleared shite up real fast.
Where do people come up with this shite??
Posted on 12/16/10 at 11:41 am to Tennessee Jed
Jed,
Do you think the reason Sweaty will get pounded is because he pissed of the NCAA by lying about the infractions?
That has to be the cause of the big hit unless there is something more out there we don't know about.
Do you think the reason Sweaty will get pounded is because he pissed of the NCAA by lying about the infractions?
That has to be the cause of the big hit unless there is something more out there we don't know about.
Posted on 12/16/10 at 11:44 am to roadGator
quote:
Do you think the reason Sweaty will get pounded is because he pissed of the NCAA by lying about the infractions?
As of right now, based on what I've read and heard.
That is 100% of the reason.
It would have been a secondary violation, if he'd admitted to having the highschool juniors over to his BBQ. (If they'd been seniors, there would have been no violation)
Plus they are going to hit him for covering it up, because he told Craft, McRae, and Selby not to mention the BBQ, because Pearl knew it was against NCAA rules.
Word is the NCAA looked hard at the program after they knew he lied, and all they could find was that he made about 90 impermissible text messages over a 5 year period.
Of course no one will know for sure, until the NCAA releases it's notice of allegations.
This post was edited on 12/16/10 at 11:46 am
Posted on 12/16/10 at 11:45 am to Tennessee Jed
That's what I was thinking too.
It's always better to say yeah I cheated mildly than deny deny deny.
It's always better to say yeah I cheated mildly than deny deny deny.
Posted on 12/16/10 at 11:47 am to Bellabama
quote:
The fact that Alfy Hill was Alfy Hilled, and Cam Newton is grinning like the Cheshire Cat (calico version), makes me ill.
Nobody gets a free lunch Bella. Someone (that other school in Alabama) is going to pay.
Posted on 12/16/10 at 11:53 am to roadGator
quote:
deny deny deny.
Gary Parrish has talked a lot about it on his show.
Said it wasn't even deny, deny, deny.
Said the NCAA was very nonchalant about it. Pearl thought it was routine questioning because of the football investigation regarding hostess gate.
They asked Pearl if he'd ever had recruits to a team function that weren't allowed. He said no, NCAA was like "well we have pictures of a highschool junior at a pool party at your house" Pearl immediately said, "ok you caught me"
Parrish said if Pearl had even answered the questions. "I don't recall" it would have amounted to nothing.
Which would have been lying too, but the NCAA couldn't prove or disprove if he remembered the event.
This post was edited on 12/16/10 at 11:54 am
Posted on 12/16/10 at 11:56 am to Tennessee Jed
They had pictures? 
Posted on 12/16/10 at 11:59 am to roadGator
Either Ohio State or Kansas turned us in.
Pictures were of Pearl with Aaron Craft and Josh Selby.
My gut feeling is was Selby. NCAA probably cut him a deal saying, if you help us with the Tennessee investigation we won't hit you to hard.
Could be why he's allowed to play this year, even though he recieved over $6,000 worth of improper benefits from KU.
Pictures were of Pearl with Aaron Craft and Josh Selby.
My gut feeling is was Selby. NCAA probably cut him a deal saying, if you help us with the Tennessee investigation we won't hit you to hard.
Could be why he's allowed to play this year, even though he recieved over $6,000 worth of improper benefits from KU.
This post was edited on 12/16/10 at 12:01 pm
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News