Started By
Message
CN ineligible -- PROOF!
Posted on 11/14/10 at 11:43 pm
Posted on 11/14/10 at 11:43 pm
taken from the 2010-2011 NCAA D1 manual:
10.1 UNETHICAL CONDUCT
Unethical conduct by a prospective or enrolled student-athlete or a current or former institutional staff member (e.g., coach, professor, tutor, teaching assistant, student manager, student trainer) may include, but is not limited to, the following: (Revised: 1/10/90, 1/9/96, 2/22/01)
(c) Knowing involvement in offering or providing a prospective or an enrolled student-athlete an improper inducement or extra benefit or improper financial aid; (Revised: 1/9/96)
10.4 DISCIPLINARY ACTION [#]
Prospective or enrolled student-athletes found in violation of the provisions of this regulation shall be ineligible for further intercollegiate competition, subject to appeal to the Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement for restoration of eligibility. (See Bylaw 10.3.2 for sanctions of student-athletes involved in violations of Bylaw 10.3.)Institutional staff members found in violation of the provisions of this regulation shall be subject to disciplinary or corrective action as set forth in Bylaw 19.5.2.2 of the NCAA enforcement procedures, whether such violations occurred at the certifying institution or during the individual’s previous employment at another member institution.
CN stated that he was letting his father choose which school he would attend. so, CN chose to let Cecil represent him --in effect-- as an agent. so, it does not matter if CN knew of his father's actions or not because Cecil was acting FOR (on behalf of, as an agent for) CN. in the eyes of the NCAA, Cecil's actions become CN's actions. therefore, when Cecil asked for under-the-table money from MSU (as admitted), he effectively involved CN in a pay-4-play scheme which resulted in CN's immediate loss of college eligibility and ending CN's collegiate career.
on a personal note, good luck to Cam in the pro's. i'm sure he'll go number 1 and then onto millions. but this is college football.
GEAUX TIGERS!
10.1 UNETHICAL CONDUCT
Unethical conduct by a prospective or enrolled student-athlete or a current or former institutional staff member (e.g., coach, professor, tutor, teaching assistant, student manager, student trainer) may include, but is not limited to, the following: (Revised: 1/10/90, 1/9/96, 2/22/01)
(c) Knowing involvement in offering or providing a prospective or an enrolled student-athlete an improper inducement or extra benefit or improper financial aid; (Revised: 1/9/96)
10.4 DISCIPLINARY ACTION [#]
Prospective or enrolled student-athletes found in violation of the provisions of this regulation shall be ineligible for further intercollegiate competition, subject to appeal to the Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement for restoration of eligibility. (See Bylaw 10.3.2 for sanctions of student-athletes involved in violations of Bylaw 10.3.)Institutional staff members found in violation of the provisions of this regulation shall be subject to disciplinary or corrective action as set forth in Bylaw 19.5.2.2 of the NCAA enforcement procedures, whether such violations occurred at the certifying institution or during the individual’s previous employment at another member institution.
CN stated that he was letting his father choose which school he would attend. so, CN chose to let Cecil represent him --in effect-- as an agent. so, it does not matter if CN knew of his father's actions or not because Cecil was acting FOR (on behalf of, as an agent for) CN. in the eyes of the NCAA, Cecil's actions become CN's actions. therefore, when Cecil asked for under-the-table money from MSU (as admitted), he effectively involved CN in a pay-4-play scheme which resulted in CN's immediate loss of college eligibility and ending CN's collegiate career.
on a personal note, good luck to Cam in the pro's. i'm sure he'll go number 1 and then onto millions. but this is college football.
GEAUX TIGERS!
4
Posted on 11/14/10 at 11:44 pm to Johnny Brannan
Please see the stickied threads above.
Posted on 11/14/10 at 11:49 pm to NBamaAlum
did i break a rule? i'm new here.
Posted on 11/14/10 at 11:50 pm to Johnny Brannan
No, it's just germans
Posted on 11/14/10 at 11:50 pm to Johnny Brannan
I'm gonna break your face.
Posted on 11/14/10 at 11:51 pm to Johnny Brannan
Please see the Memphis thread above me.
Posted on 11/14/10 at 11:52 pm to Johnny Brannan
The problem Auburn is going to have is that they never applied for reinstatement after the MSU ordeal.
Posted on 11/14/10 at 11:53 pm to NBamaAlum
Looks pretty damning.
Agent or not. When Cam signed the letter of intent, he was over the age of 18. We aren't talking about a 17 year-old here who has to have a parent sign for him. He was/is of legal age to go/do whatever HE wanted. I would find it very hard to believe that he wanted to go to MSU so bad, yet his Dad told him to sign with Auburn so he just did.
Agent or not. When Cam signed the letter of intent, he was over the age of 18. We aren't talking about a 17 year-old here who has to have a parent sign for him. He was/is of legal age to go/do whatever HE wanted. I would find it very hard to believe that he wanted to go to MSU so bad, yet his Dad told him to sign with Auburn so he just did.
Posted on 11/14/10 at 11:56 pm to BamaScoop
quote:
The problem Auburn is going to have is that they never applied for reinstatement after the MSU ordeal.
That has been my assumption as well, but I was reading elsewhere and this came up. Is it possible (I am actually asking - not pondering metaphysically) that AU could have quietly suspended Cam in July when they got all this stuff, applied and had Cam reinstated based on what was out there then? That would go a long way towards explaining the confidence AU has shown in saying that Cam is eligible etc.
Posted on 11/14/10 at 11:57 pm to APIEE
quote:
That has been my assumption as well, but I was reading elsewhere and this came up. Is it possible (I am actually asking - not pondering metaphysically) that AU could have quietly suspended Cam in July when they got all this stuff, applied and had Cam reinstated based on what was out there then? That would go a long way towards explaining the confidence AU has shown in saying that Cam is eligible etc.
My only response to that would be, why not call a press conference and explain that one time to the press and then never address it again.
Posted on 11/14/10 at 11:59 pm to APIEE
"That would go a long way towards explaining the confidence AU has shown in saying that Cam is eligible etc. "
It might. The main issue I see with that is they don't appear to have that level of confidence at this time. We have gone from emphatic declarations to "No Comment". The wagon's have been circled.
It might. The main issue I see with that is they don't appear to have that level of confidence at this time. We have gone from emphatic declarations to "No Comment". The wagon's have been circled.
Posted on 11/15/10 at 12:00 am to BamaScoop
The theory would be that the NCAA has had more info come in, etc. and since an investigation is taking place they can't talk about it. I don't think that this is a terribly likely scenario, but wondered if it would indeed be possible based on the NCAA workings. I honestly don't know.
quote:
My only response to that would be, why not call a press conference and explain that one time to the press and then never address it again.
Posted on 11/15/10 at 12:04 am to APIEE
APIEE
With this story, anything is possible. I agree with what you said earlier. Not likely. But, this story has simply amazed me. It has developed relatively quickly. One has to wonder if we go into a silent period while parts are investigated or if information will continue to flow over the next two weeks.
With this story, anything is possible. I agree with what you said earlier. Not likely. But, this story has simply amazed me. It has developed relatively quickly. One has to wonder if we go into a silent period while parts are investigated or if information will continue to flow over the next two weeks.
Posted on 11/15/10 at 12:12 am to Fat Fingers
quote:
With this story, anything is possible. I agree with what you said earlier. Not likely. But, this story has simply amazed me. It has developed relatively quickly. One has to wonder if we go into a silent period while parts are investigated or if information will continue to flow over the next two weeks.
I wouldn't be shocked to see things settle down a bit here in the next couple of weeks. That doesn't comport very well to the message board rumors that are swirling about, so I guess we will just have to wait and see. I am at the point now of not knowing who or what to trust, and I am pretty much disregarding anything that's not coming from NCAA, SEC, or in a University press conference/release.
The tremendous amount of speculative or flat inaccurate reporting has made me very gun shy to trust the media, and the comments from either side of things are so clouded by agendas that I can't really figure out what the hell went down. Obviously Cecil, Bond and Rogers all have pretty large interests in protecting themselves and with the contradicting stories being told, I don't know what to think.
Posted on 11/15/10 at 12:21 am to Johnny Brannan
you might want to bring this to the NCAA and FBI great find...Hurry they need your help stat. 
Posted on 11/15/10 at 3:20 am to RockyMtnTigerWDE
Enjoy it, Auburn, because Cam-gate ain't over
quote:
Get it out, Auburn. Get it all out now.
Party your behinds off. Burn the mother to the ground. T.P. the town if you want. Live 'til you Dye. War Cam Eagle and all that. Saturday might be all you have.
Posted on 11/15/10 at 3:26 am to Johnny Brannan
It is very likely that Slive has told both AU and MSU to be quiet while the NCAA is doing there work. It hasn't just been AU that has been tight lipped for a while. I may be wrong, but it wouldn't surprise me. This has gotten so out of hand, that i doubt Slive wants any more crap going around making the SEC look any worse.
Posted on 11/15/10 at 3:27 am to Johnny Brannan
quote:
Johnny Brannan
That guy sounds like a reporter that is pissed he didn't get any interviews or comments from Cam or Chizik.
Posted on 11/15/10 at 4:05 am to e2drummer
i like the way this CBS guy is reporting.
quote:
The NCAA is scheduled in January to hear USC's appeal on the Reggie Bush case. The BCS is waiting for the presumed rejection of that appeal to vacate the Trojans' 2004 BCS title. Could the BCS be dealing with two cases at once? If Auburn wins the 2010 national championship, it too could be vacated if Newton is later found to have played while ineligible.
Posted on 11/15/10 at 7:05 am to Johnny Brannan
Please quit posting.
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News