Started By
Message

re: NCAA had no choice

Posted on 12/2/10 at 2:34 pm to
Posted by GoCrazyAuburn
Member since Feb 2010
35014 posts
Posted on 12/2/10 at 2:34 pm to
quote:

Just to remind you - from Cecil and Cam's own mouths, before this whole thing broke-



But this mentions nothing of Cam knowing about the money stuff. Just that Cecil told his son to go to AU. How does that directly mean "Cam knew about everything?".

Also, I had this pointed out too me and it has a lot of correlation to what is going on.


Here is the full text of the NCAA's statement ...

The NCAA student-athlete reinstatement staff has reinstated the eligibility of University of Alabama football student-athletes Julio Jones and Mark Ingram based on a condition of repayment.

According to the facts of the case submitted by Alabama, the student-athletes received impermissible food, lodging, transportation and entertainment from an individual with whom one of the student-athletes had become acquainted prior to enrolling in college.

Consistent with NCAA membership requirements, the institution reported the violation and declared the student-athletes ineligible. As part of the reinstatement request, the institution required the student-athletes to make repayment of the value of the impermissible benefits to charity.

During the reinstatement process, the NCAA staff considers a number of factors including guidelines established by the NCAA Division I Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement, relevant case precedent, the student-athlete's responsibility for the violation, as well as any mitigating factors presented by the institution.


The fishing case had a very similar ruling as this one, but Juio and ingram had to repay the benefits they received. In Cam's case, no benefits were received, so he didn't have to repay anything before being reinstated. Just found it interesting.
Posted by Govt Tide
Member since Nov 2009
9153 posts
Posted on 12/2/10 at 2:50 pm to
The Alabama situation with Ingram and Julio involved Alabama ruling them ineligible and the NCAA reinstating them after a two game suspension. In other words, they had to be ruled ineligible and reinstated by the NCAA prior to playing again. True, it was determined that the players received a benefit and that's not the case with Cam Newton, BUT Auburn never went through the reinstatement process until Nov 30, 2010 which was nearly a year after they were aware of eligibility issues with Cam Newton. Regardless of what Cam knew or didn't know and whether actual illegal benefits were received, that is a failure to follow NCAA protocol and that alone should be an NCAA penalty. Forget that there was no payment and this involved MSU and not Auburn, Cam Newton was damaged goods at that point and a solicitation violation had occurred which the NCAA just stated. Auburn failed to properly reinstate Newton prior to the 2010 football season. They waited after the regular season to declare him ineligible despite the issue being crystal clear well before the start of the season.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter