Started By
Message
re: new USAToday Cam article...
Posted on 11/17/10 at 8:03 am to castorinho
Posted on 11/17/10 at 8:03 am to castorinho
quote:
If you believe Kenny then yeah
Exactly. Without any actual proof, it comes down to credibility, and Rogers has none.
2
Posted on 11/17/10 at 8:04 am to bamaboy87
quote:
Do you really trust JJ?
Jay Jacobs yes, Chizik yes, Trooper no, Pat Dye no fricking way, the boosters lmfao.
Posted on 11/17/10 at 8:04 am to Jaybee44
quote:
Jaybee44
You barners are really coming out of the wood work to defend your family's honor. Good luck with that.
Posted on 11/17/10 at 8:06 am to Marines4Auburn
quote:
Jay Jacobs said after the meeting Thursday the NCAA gave them no indication or reason for sitting Cam.
From a PURELY "sanctions" point of view, I doubt that anything draconian will happen to AU IF it is only found that Cam was ineligible (AU did not pay, etc)
Yes, I get the "played a known ineligible" argument, but given the circustance, I just do not believe there is great risk. There is a reasonable argument that AU can make that they really believed Cam would be cleared to play and there was too much at risk for the season and Cam personally to simply 'sit' him.
Now, from a "smell test" point of view and a "moral" perspective, (I PERSONALLY believe that Cam will be ruled ineligible) AU looks more skeevy for NOT sitting him.
Posted on 11/17/10 at 8:14 am to SlidellBammer
Auburn has no choice, they have to play Cam, he's their team.
If Cam were a lesser player he would not be playing. Plain and simple.
If Cam were a lesser player he would not be playing. Plain and simple.
Posted on 11/17/10 at 9:04 am to BlackHelicopterPilot
Given that nothing has implicated Auburn in the things we know so far and that this happened with another school, thus giving them no reasonable way of knowing about it, I can see how the resolution of this COULD be Cam is inelgible but Auburn is not penalized forfeits or vacated wins because he played for them.
It would also make sense from the standpoint of Auburn playing him at UGA. Gives them the West and a shot at SEC game even if they lose him. Win/win for them.
Plus if Auburn is truly innocent in this it makes sense from a fairness point of view.
It would also make sense from the standpoint of Auburn playing him at UGA. Gives them the West and a shot at SEC game even if they lose him. Win/win for them.
Plus if Auburn is truly innocent in this it makes sense from a fairness point of view.
Posted on 11/17/10 at 9:16 am to Latarian
The situation is very fluid.
Fluid as in diarrhea from a bull's rectum.
Presser at 4 pm today!
Fluid as in diarrhea from a bull's rectum.
Presser at 4 pm today!
Posted on 11/17/10 at 9:18 am to pdxlsufan
quote:
Presser at 4 pm today!
if someone in Camgate ever does call a presser at 4, no one is gonna buy it.
Posted on 11/17/10 at 9:22 am to wareagle95
quote:
Did you ever think that maybe Cecil was looking for money only from MSU because he was aware that Dan Mullen was ok with it.. i.e Cam was aware of benefits that Florida players were getting while at Florida..
So this time "It wasn't going to be free" per the words of Cecil..
aren't you contradicting yourself?
either Florida was corrupt and you think Dan was OK with that... or this time it won't be free (because the first time it was)
Posted on 11/17/10 at 9:28 am to tigersruledude
quote:
I can see how the resolution of this COULD be Cam is inelgible but Auburn is not penalized forfeits or vacated wins
No possibility of this. IF Cam is ruled ineligible, ALL wins (in which he played) WILL be vacated / forfeited.
No way around that. If they did no wrong, they will (likely) not be sanctioned further.
Posted on 11/17/10 at 9:32 am to Jaybee44
quote:
it comes down to credibility, and Rogers has none
What does he gain by lying about this. All the things that he are coming out with do are hurt him and his business.
Who is credible? Cecil Newton? Cam? Chiz? JJ? AU Booster? Please tell me you don't think so.
Posted on 11/17/10 at 9:35 am to wareagle95
quote:
he is going to play at lowly MSU
You assume that Mississippi St is that much different from Auburn....I say wake up.
quote:
Do you think that MSU is 11 - 0 right now with Cam
Do you think Auburn is 11-0 WITHOUT Cam?
quote:
he decided he didn't want his son "to be a rented mule".
Nice assumption there hotrod.
This post was edited on 11/17/10 at 9:36 am
Posted on 11/17/10 at 9:41 am to wareagle95
quote:
Do you think that MSU is 11 - 0 right now with Cam.
Most likely Yes IMO
And Auburn would probably have 6 or 7 wins
Posted on 11/17/10 at 9:45 am to Hog Springs
quote:
I still have a really hard time believing that State was the only school Cecil solicited.
quote:I get why people ask this, but let me provide a plausible explanation or two. First plausible theory, maybe Cecil, after trying to get money from MSU and being turned down, was also alerted that the solicitation had been reported to the MSU AD. Knowing this, he decided to get away from the situation and steered Cam to AU. Second plausible theory, maybe MSU was the only school where he had a relationship with an alumni (Kenny Rogers) that he felt was shady enough to help him try to pull this off.
Why the hell solicit money from the one school your son wants to go, without doing it to the others?
I don't see any reason other schools (OU, Tenn.) would publicly state they were not asked for money unless it was true. If they had been approached, they would have kept it quiet and discussed it with the NCAA behind closed doors.
None of this proves AU was not asked for money, nor does it prove AU did not pay money. These are just plausible scenarios to explain why Cecil only solicited money from MSU (allegedly).
Posted on 11/17/10 at 9:45 am to wareagle95
quote:
Did you ever think that maybe Cecil was looking for money only from MSU because he was aware that Dan Mullen was ok with it.. i.e Cam was aware of benefits that Florida players were getting while at Florida.. So this time "It wasn't going to be free" per the words of Cecil.. Therefore, he is thinking if he is going to play at lowly MSU, then the only way it is happening is if he gets paid.. and even then I am not sure it is worth it.. Do you think that MSU is 11 - 0 right now with Cam.. I am sure his father figured it would be completely on Cam's shoulders (not great protection and no great skill players) and he would not be able to have the same success.. Therefore, he decided he didn't want his son "to be a rented mule".
That's a little bit of a stretch brah
Posted on 11/17/10 at 9:48 am to WDE24
quote:
I don't see any reason other schools (OU, Tenn.) would publicly state they were not asked for money unless it was true. If they had been approached, they would have kept it quiet and discussed it with the NCAA behind closed doors.
Disagree strongly with this
There is no positive side for them to come forward... their programs will be dragged through the mud and they will have to devote weeks to talking with NCAA people about the issue
Much easier to say "nope, didn't see anything" than to deal with that
Posted on 11/17/10 at 9:50 am to molsusports
quote:
I don't see any reason other schools (OU, Tenn.) would publicly state they were not asked for money unless it was true. If they had been approached, they would have kept it quiet and discussed it with the NCAA behind closed doors.
quote:Maybe, but they know the NCAA and others are investigating this. If they lie about it now and then the NCAA learns through their investigation that they lied, the institutions are in serious trouble. JMO.
Disagree strongly with this
There is no positive side for them to come forward... their programs will be dragged through the mud and they will have to devote weeks to talking with NCAA people about the issue
Much easier to say "nope, didn't see anything" than to deal with that
Posted on 11/17/10 at 9:55 am to WDE24
it was already a violation for them if they didn't report the request for money when it happened
most likely the cleaner programs do what the MSU coaches supposedly originally did... back away from the person asking and say "no, no... I didn't hear that"
the dirty programs IMO would be even less likely to come clean
most likely the cleaner programs do what the MSU coaches supposedly originally did... back away from the person asking and say "no, no... I didn't hear that"
the dirty programs IMO would be even less likely to come clean
Posted on 11/17/10 at 9:58 am to molsusports
quote:
quote:
I don't see any reason other schools (OU, Tenn.) would publicly state they were not asked for money unless it was true. If they had been approached, they would have kept it quiet and discussed it with the NCAA behind closed doors.
Disagree strongly with this
There is no positive side for them to come forward... their programs will be dragged through the mud and they will have to devote weeks to talking with NCAA people about the issue
Much easier to say "nope, didn't see anything" than to deal with that
+1
OU has had their own trouble with pay-for-play - "Big Red Motors" and had to kick off players from their team for it. UT - Kiffin had them in so much secondary violation trouble that I doubt very seriously they want to invite the NCAA back to campus any time soon. It's just so much easier to say "we know nothing and had no problems with Newton's recruitment" than to say otherwise.
Posted on 11/17/10 at 10:01 am to WDE24
quote:
Maybe, but they know the NCAA and others are investigating this. If they lie about it now and then the NCAA learns through their investigation that they lied, the institutions are in serious trouble. JMO.
bullshite - Those programs do not want the NCAA back on campus for any reason, period. They've "been there and done that" this decade and UT is still waiting to hear what the NCAA decides about hostess-gate.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News