Started By
Message
re: This is no longer about Auburn, it is about the next university...
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:22 pm to PJinAtl
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:22 pm to PJinAtl
quote:
I think we can all agree on that point. Where I disagreed with the OP was that it will open the floodgates to pay players either from the schools directly or from big money boosters fo the schools. I think that as long as the institutions can be held responsible and punished, that will continue to be a big enough deterrent to keep it from expanding.
I don't know that it'll open the floodgates to pay players.
What it will do is open the floodgates for family to ask for money on their kids' behalf, and the schools and the NCAA are going to get inundated with a deluge of this stupid bullshite and honestly. They'll have no one to blame but themselves. What these dumb motherfrickers seem to fail to remember is that their press releases are, in equal parts, fact and perception. I don't think it will take a rocket scientist to figure out how the cash-strapped family of a naturally gifted athlete might perceive this shite, do you?
0
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:23 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
quote:
However, the threat of major sanctions against the program should keep this from mushrooming on that side of the equation because nothing in the ruling today changes that
Before today, we always assume that if a player's dad asked for money, whether or not the player knew, the player would be found to be ineligible.
Before today, we always thought that if a player's dad was paid by a booster, whether or no the player knew, the player would be found ineligible.
Based on what Kevin Lennon said today, both of those assumptions were wrong. It is all about the player's responsibility. Did he know? If not, no consequences for him. That is why this is so scary.....the floodgates have opened. Reread Lennon's statement.
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:26 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
quote:
I don't know that it'll open the floodgates to pay players.
Of course it will. Kevin Lennon said that when evaluating a player's eligibility that his personal responsibility/knowledge is what is evaluated. He mentioned no other factor.
Why would your degree of responsibility matter for one infraction but not another? Because you want it that way? Because you personally want different infractions handled in different ways? That is just silly......
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:28 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
quote:
Dr Drunkenstein
Players get paid all of the time! Rhett Bomar got paid under the table, Reggie Bush, hell I know a guy from my high school that played for UT and he received improper benefits. Every major university does this stop acting like Auburn is the Hitler of college football because one of our players is involved with a scandal.
This post was edited on 12/1/10 at 10:28 pm
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:28 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
quote:I have read Lennon's statement.
Based on what Kevin Lennon said today, both of those assumptions were wrong. It is all about the player's responsibility. Did he know? If not, no consequences for him. That is why this is so scary.....the floodgates have opened. Reread Lennon's statement.
Quote me the part where he said 'it's all about the player's responsibility'.
He merely said that they had to consider it.
Consider.
Consider.
Consider.
Goddam, you are thick.
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:29 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
quote:
Why would your degree of responsibility matter for one infraction but not another?
Because it only takes one party (the player's family) to solicit money.
It takes a second party (booster/coach/waterboy) with more to lose to actually make money change hands.
The players and families, we've established, are taking no risks. The boosters might be running a bit scared right now, though.
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:37 pm to Marines4Auburn
quote:
Players get paid all of the time! Rhett Bomar got paid under the table
No he didn't. He got paid out in the open at a no-show job he was instructed to take by employees of the OU athletic department. But Brett knew he was being compensated this way. Even if we find out that Auburn paid Cecil 180K, if Cam didn't know, based on what Kevin Lennon said today, Cam and Auburn are still fine and the wins won't be vacated.
quote:
hell I know a guy from my high school that played for UT and he received improper benefits.
Several guys from my high school in Sugar Land who went to play for Colorado in the late 80s & early 90s told me that got money, but this was just talk, I never saw the money......did you see the money your friend got from UT?
quote:
I have read Lennon's statement. Quote me the part where he said 'it's all about the player's responsibility'. He merely said that they had to consider it.
Okay
quote:
In determining how a violation impacts a student-athlete's eligibility, we must consider the young person's responsibility
quote:
Consider. Consider. Consider. Goddam, you are thick.
Okay, if I am missing out on some mystery factor that only you can esoterically produce from Lennon's explanation for why Newton was exonerated, please enlighten us.
There was a violation. Newton was exonerated because he didn't know of the violation. His responsibility/knowledge was the only factor mentioned that I can see.
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:39 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
quote:
Because it only takes one party (the player's family) to solicit money. It takes a second party (booster/coach/waterboy) with more to lose to actually make money change hands.
So, if I understand you correctly, the player's family is soliciting money from themselves? If not, there has to be a second party they are soliciting.
Nice try......but still a swing and a miss.
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:42 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
i KNOW FOR A FACT THAT A MAJOR UNIVERSITY PAYS PLAYERS..im not gonna name the university, but said university has a booster who i know personally, and he pays players..FACT
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:46 pm to Hook Em Horns
quote:
i KNOW FOR A FACT THAT A MAJOR UNIVERSITY PAYS PLAYERS..im not gonna name the university, but said university has a booster who i know personally, and he pays players..FACT
Maybe you do. Maybe you don't......but seriously, what value to this discussion is your baseless, unsupported, undocumented, anonymous claim going to bring?
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:47 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
maybe it's about paying players maybe?? isnt this what this thread is about?? 
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:47 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
quote:
So, if I understand you correctly, the player's family is soliciting money from themselves?
...what?
What the frick are you talking about? I'm going to make this shite blackboard simple:
School=A
Cecil=X
Booster=Y
Cam=Z
If X solicits money from A (or from Y on A's behalf) and is turned down, the solicitation rule has been broken and Z is unaffected, since he "didn't even fricking know."
If X solicits money from A (or from Y on A's behalf) and the request is granted, then a pay-for-play rule has been broken and A and Y stand to get their asses handed to them while X and Z laugh all the way to the bank and, later, the NFL.
SINCE, IN THE SECOND SCENARIO, there are more people involved than just the player and his family in the rule-breaking process, then it's logical to assume that the other parties (booster, coach, school, waterboy, etc) will shy away from the deal because of the risks THEY would incur.
quote:
Nice try......but still a swing and a miss.
Were you talking about you or me there?
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:52 pm to FearlessFreep
quote:
You ARE aware, aren't you, that the NCAA makes the same amount of money from the TV rights regardless of what two teams end up playing in it, don't you?
The SEC is the one pushing this. They stand to gain 10s of millions of dollars or loss that on this. The SEC could stop this in a heart beat but they are motivated to stone wall it.
What can happen is parents can extort payments from schools that in the end don't sign the player and the players is free to continue to play since they don't know about it and they didn't sign at the schools that paid them. This isn't about Auburn but about the amateur status of Newton.
This post was edited on 12/1/10 at 10:58 pm
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:54 pm to cyde
quote:
If X solicits money from A (or from Y on A's behalf) and the request is granted, then a pay-for-play rule has been broken and A and Y stand to get their asses handed to them while X and Z laugh all the way to the bank and, later, the NFL.
I think you have made one key error. Now that we know players aren't held accountable if they "didn't know", it seems only reasonable that schools will also be given a pass if they "didn't know". At the very least, they can make a strong argument in this direction.
Also, why would Z be laughing all the way to the bank? He didn't know about the money that his father received.
Putting both of those issues aside, it still seems that college football has never had a shortage of boosters willing to pay players. It never will. What kept things in check in the past was the potential consequences for the student-athlete but now, if he doesn't know, he isn't responsible, regardless of the severity of the violation. That is all that really matters.
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:55 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
quote:
Before today, we always assume that if a player's dad asked for money, whether or not the player knew, the player would be found to be ineligible.
Before today, we always thought that if a player's dad was paid by a booster, whether or no the player knew, the player would be found ineligible.
Right. The difference comes from what we all assume the law to mean and what the actual law entails. It's called a gray area or a loophole. CFB programs have lived in this gray area for decades. Now that doesn't make it right, but it is the case. The NCAA is going to have to revise the rule so they can shut Pandora's Box which will in effect make any other school/booster/player/fan take the "Auburn, Cam, and Cecil got away with it...this is unfair" route as you said.
Secondly, as of now, no connection has been made to Auburn or any Auburn booster offering Cecil money. The pay/play arrangement was between Mississippi St and Cecil.
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:56 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
quote:
.but seriously, what value to this discussion is your baseless, unsupported, undocumented, anonymous claim going to bring?
Hasn't all of those dominated the entire Cam Newton story?
People are automatically assuming Cam received 200k from Auburn just because his dad solicited MSU. Thats not to say Cam didn't get money because I know how crooked Pat Dye and Lowder are.
As far as my friends actually showing me the money while at UT, I never saw it. This was back when I was enlisted and stationed in Missouri. He just told me about how good he gets taken care of down there.
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:58 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
quote:
What kept things in check in the past was the potential consequences for the student-athlete but now, if he doesn't know, he isn't responsible, regardless of the severity of the violation. That is all that really matters.
All this really did was make us all aware that a loophole we didn't know existed, actually does exist. NCAA will be under a tremendous amount of pressure to close that up.
Posted on 12/1/10 at 11:00 pm to BMW7SERIES
quote:
Secondly, as of now, no connection has been made to Auburn or any Auburn booster offering Cecil money. The pay/play arrangement was between Mississippi St and Cecil.
I never said there was. I did say that, per Kevin Lennon's statement today, IF Cecil was paid by Auburn, it wouldn't have mattered.
As for Marines4Auburn's comments....I'm trying to move away from 'assumptions' and to focus on what people, like Kevin Lennon, actually said.
Posted on 12/1/10 at 11:00 pm to Marines4Auburn
quote:
People are automatically assuming Cam received 200k from Auburn just because his dad solicited MSU. Thats not to say Cam didn't get money because I know how crooked Pat Dye and Lowder are.
True. While it may be reasonable to ASSUME money was offered to Cecil by Auburn, it has yet to be proven.
Posted on 12/1/10 at 11:00 pm to BMW7SERIES
quote:
It's called a gray area or a loophole.
"The Commissioner has the duty and power to investigate the validity of violations and impose penalties and sanctions against member institutions, their athletic staff members or student-athletes, for practices and conduct which violate the spirit, as well as the letter of NCAA and SEC rules and regulations.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News