quote:
For the logical equation, A + B = C to work you have to have A and C be correct, B can be unknown and we can make logical deductions and it still makes logical sense (i.e. A= Grandma needed milk and eggs C= Grandma arrived at home with milk and eggs, B is unknown but it is safe to assume Grandma went to the grocery store)

A= Cecil/Cam Newton solicit money from MSU, stating that it would take money to get Cam "this time" (ALLEGED)

C= Cam ends up at Auburn (known)

FIFY.

quote:
Can anyone guess what B is?

Not definitively. However, if Rogers' story can be corroborated, it would be pretty easy to figure out.

Can't believe there are AU fans who still think there's still nothing in this that will hurt us.

But I also can't believe that there are State fans who think this 'puts us in the clear'.

Let's use Larry's A+B=C analogy:

A= MSU alum (Rogers) takes part in a meeting with two MSU coaches and Cecil in November, where money is discussed. Rogers contacts another MSU alum (Bell) for potential bankroll, and puts him in contact with Cecil to discuss it further. (ALLEGED)

C= MSU reports recruiting improprieties (but not the above conversation) to SEC office in January, after Cam signs with AU. They subsequently ignore SEC requests for further information for six months, until NCAA gets involved. (known)

Can anyone out there speculate what B might be?

I'm guessing it's not "B= We tell Cecil to frick off, we're not paying a dime, but we keep recruiting Cam anyway. We decide not to tell anyone about the November conversation involving MSU alums/boosters/coaches, because we don't think its very important. Even though we know AU bought Cam."

This post was edited on 11/11/10 at 3:48 pm