re: Newton Eligibility Ruling Question

quote:

---

Cam's cheating, if he indeed cheated, was never reported through the official channels at FL

---

You would never know this, reported or not. Schools CANNOT divulge information on students without a court order.

quote:

---

Either way, he was able to tranfer to JUCO and was cleared by the NCAA clearinghouse before playing for AU, so I guess his academic status is fine.

---

I'm not sure, but i don't think you need to be re-cleared by the NCAA clearinghouse, provided you have not expired the terms of the "clock" or are asking for a change in the time on that "clock"

quote:

---

They are no longer representative of the U of F and are free to talk about first hand information they have.

---

Since Cam supposedly left before it occurred, and considering then that since it wouldn't have been first hand information if he NEVER went before a hearing/committee/whatever...how does their statements exonerate him?

If he never met with those individuals, it would not have been first hand knowledge. BTW FERPA does not grant a "first-hand" knowledge exception.

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."