Started By
Message
re: Apparently there are tapes Auburn- rut rohhhhhh
Posted on 2/25/11 at 10:41 am to Thracken13
Posted on 2/25/11 at 10:41 am to Thracken13
Now NCAA looking at Auburn recruiting in Aubrn
While confirming what we know about the NCAA investigating Auburn's recruiting practices in Louisiana, he also said it's about to look into Auburn's recruiting in Arkansas as well. Auburn's recent signees from Arkansas include RB Michael Dyer and TE Dakota Mosley in 2010 and QB Kiehl Frazier in 2011.
While confirming what we know about the NCAA investigating Auburn's recruiting practices in Louisiana, he also said it's about to look into Auburn's recruiting in Arkansas as well. Auburn's recent signees from Arkansas include RB Michael Dyer and TE Dakota Mosley in 2010 and QB Kiehl Frazier in 2011.
1
Posted on 2/25/11 at 10:42 am to WDE24
quote:
WDE24
did you listen to the link? The guy is saying what I said before the Georgia game. You think it's just a strange coincidence?
Posted on 2/25/11 at 10:43 am to Monticello
quote:
Like I said at the beginning of this ordeal, I don't doubt at all that Cecil claimed these 2 schools were offering money. I know he told State that UT was offering. However, they are all very likely lies to try to convince State to match an offer. I don't think most people realize just how scummy Cecil was in this whole process.
Good Point. Assume for a moment the tapes are true, they would still have to prove that Auburn or even UT offered money. They couldn't just convict off of the tapes.
Posted on 2/25/11 at 10:43 am to SugarHog
quote:
damn this is getting old.
FACT - there is no rule against asking for money, there are only rules against offering money to a player, OR the player (or his representative) actually receiving money.
Yes it's shady to ask a school for money, but it isn't against the rules; and until such time as it is made against the rules, that is the end of that.
Dude, you are dead wrong. It is definitely against the rules to ask for money to commit to a school. What was not illegal at the time was to have someone else do it for you so long as it can't be shown that you yourself knew someone was asking for money.
Posted on 2/25/11 at 10:43 am to RT1941
I'll go on to say that I don't think the tapes implicate AU directly. They do have the AU offer as stated by Cecil, BUT, that does not mean he actually had an AU offer. But what the tapes do imply is that Cam knew. Therefore, the "loophole" is irrelevant and Cam was ineligible all season. That is all this "new" info amounts to IMO.
This post was edited on 2/25/11 at 10:44 am
Posted on 2/25/11 at 10:43 am to CoonassBulldog
quote:I think there is no way the NCAA heard tapes that proved Cam knew of the situation before they made their reinstatement decision and then reinstated him and publicly said that it was because Cam didn't know. NCAA may be stupid, but there is no way they are that stupid.
did you listen to the link? The guy is saying what I said before the Georgia game. You think it's just a strange coincidence?
ETA: There may be tapes of Cecil discussing p4p with MSU. Hell, there may be tapes proving Cam knew of Cecil's actions, but there is no way that the NCAA heard or knew about said tapes before reinstating Newton.
This post was edited on 2/25/11 at 10:47 am
Posted on 2/25/11 at 10:46 am to WDE24
quote:
NCAA may be stupid, but there is no way they are that stupid.
If they are I am going out to buy some fricking tin foil.
Posted on 2/25/11 at 10:46 am to AUnite
At this point I don't give a shite if Cam knew or got paid anymore.. What I find fascinating are MSU fans who are so jealous or hurt that Cam didn't choose their school that they cling to this idea of the greatness they feel they were robbed of because evil AU out bid them.
Jesus Christ you guys are holding up claims of your boosters/ coaches having conversations about pay for play with Cecil as evidence of how dirty AU is, but you ignore the fact that it's your freaking boosters talking money. How many times did you guys actually tell Cecil NO we aren't paying you? Produce for me a tape of anyone at MSU actually telling Cecil they weren't going to pay. I guess they must have been telling him no all the way up until signing day.
Did AU pay for Cam? I don't know. If there was a bidding war for Cam, I would bet my last dollar MSU was involved too. Just own up to the fact that you guys got outbid because there isn't a 180k in Starkville.
Jesus Christ you guys are holding up claims of your boosters/ coaches having conversations about pay for play with Cecil as evidence of how dirty AU is, but you ignore the fact that it's your freaking boosters talking money. How many times did you guys actually tell Cecil NO we aren't paying you? Produce for me a tape of anyone at MSU actually telling Cecil they weren't going to pay. I guess they must have been telling him no all the way up until signing day.
Did AU pay for Cam? I don't know. If there was a bidding war for Cam, I would bet my last dollar MSU was involved too. Just own up to the fact that you guys got outbid because there isn't a 180k in Starkville.
Posted on 2/25/11 at 10:47 am to sugatowng
quote:
The lingering question is how Cam Newton could have been found ignorant of his father's shakedown of MSU if such a tape really exists. I can think of a few ways: 1) there is more doubt about Cam's presence in the room on the tape than Moore believes there is, 2) the NCAA hadn't yet heard that tape when the reinstatement decision was made, and/or 3) the reinstatement decision was based solely on information furnished by Auburn itself, which would not have included any evidence turned over by Bond and Bell.
As for the first one, it's completely plausible. For the second one, Moore says the NCAA doesn't have all the tapes from Bond and Bell so he doesn't know which the NCAA has heard. That one seems somewhat fishy; I would have thought the incriminating tape would be the first one they would turn over.
As for the last one, the NCAA's official statement said the reinstatement decision came from a list of facts that Auburn and the NCAA enforcement staff agreed upon. I simply don't know enough about the reinstatement process to know if this means the enforcement staff told Auburn everything it knew or if this is a case of giving Auburn and/or the Newtons enough rope to hang themselves with by witholding contradictory information.
Regardless, Bond clearly believes that he has evidence contradicting the idea that Cam Newton had no knowledge of his father shopping him around, and according to Moore, he'll make the tapes containing that evidence public at some point. Until then, we'll just have to keep watching and waiting.
Posted on 2/25/11 at 10:51 am to CoonassBulldog
quote:This is the only possible scenario in my opinion.
1) there is more doubt about Cam's presence in the room on the tape than Moore believes there is,
quote:Maybe, but wouldn't Bell and Bond have told the NCAA about this when questioned. If not, why the hell not?
2) the NCAA hadn't yet heard that tape when the reinstatement decision was made
quote:This doesn't make any sense logically, nor does it make sense in light of the statements made by Emmert on multiple occasions since the decision was made.
3) the reinstatement decision was based solely on information furnished by Auburn itself, which would not have included any evidence turned over by Bond and Bell.
ETA: 69
This post was edited on 2/25/11 at 10:54 am
Posted on 2/25/11 at 10:55 am to GoCrazyAuburn
quote:
Good Point. Assume for a moment the tapes are true, they would still have to prove that Auburn or even UT offered money. They couldn't just convict off of the tapes.
The NCAA ruled Cam eligible to play based on the fact that AU attny's presented the 'AA with the angle that Cam didn't KNOW his father (the Bishop)was shopping his services.
Whether AU or even UT offered money or paid money - if it is found that Cam KNEW what the Bishop was doing - Cam will be ruled ineligible to play ball.
Posted on 2/25/11 at 10:55 am to GoCrazyAuburn
quote:
Good Point. Assume for a moment the tapes are true, they would still have to prove that Auburn or even UT offered money. They couldn't just convict off of the tapes.
Yes and No. They couldn't fully support a finding that Auburn offered or paid money based on the tapes. However, they absolutely could support a finding that Cam knew what his father was doing if you can hear Cam in the tapes (which this guy says you can). That would mean Cam was ineligible for the entire season and at minimum the banners go down and the record book says 0-14.
Posted on 2/25/11 at 10:57 am to tuck
quote:
Therefore, the "loophole" is irrelevant and Cam was ineligible all season. That is all this "new" info amounts to IMO.
This. The tapes don't prove Auburn paid money, but they do likely mean 0-14.
Posted on 2/25/11 at 11:00 am to WDE24
quote:
Maybe, but wouldn't Bell and Bond have told the NCAA about this when questioned. If not, why the hell not?
These tapes are extremely valuable personal property which have little to no value once made public. These 2 are trying to sell the tapes to the highest bidder. In other words, who gets the breaking documentary will be the media outlet willing to pay the most for it.
Posted on 2/25/11 at 11:05 am to CoonassBulldog
quote:
You think it's just a strange coincidence?
Nothing pertaining to Auburn's football program and the continuous smoke it creates is coincidence.
It's no freaking coincidence that AU is currently tied to State and Federal indictments because of it's connection with crooks that support their program both financially and through their administration.
It's no freaking coincidence that the NCAA has questioned Cecil's building contractors regarding the church's repairs.
It's no freaking coincidence that the NCAA questioned former coaches, street agents and the parent's of recruits in Thibidaux (sp) last week.
Posted on 2/25/11 at 11:07 am to Monticello
quote:Even if true, does that mean that Bond and Bell intentionally withheld the nature of the contents of the tapes from the NCAA?
These tapes are extremely valuable personal property which have little to no value once made public. These 2 are trying to sell the tapes to the highest bidder. In other words, who gets the breaking documentary will be the media outlet willing to pay the most for it.
Posted on 2/25/11 at 11:07 am to reb13
quote:
Wouldn't this be bad for state too? Considering they were offering money too?
WTF are you talking about?
Auburn fans, why do you just twist this around and brush it off like it means absolutely nothing? You act like there is absolutely no way any of it is true and no way you did anything wrong. shite, just be honest. When I talk about the situation, I'm not doing it as a flame. Let's just wait and see what comes out. If it turns out to be true, yeah I'll be pissed because all of this crap took wins away from our program. If it turns out that Auburn did nothing wrong, I'll be glad everything was done the right way and glad the SEC avoided punishment. But enough with the denial and acting like there's no way anything went down. Sheesh.
Posted on 2/25/11 at 11:08 am to Monticello
quote:
These tapes are extremely valuable personal property which have little to no value once made public. These 2 are trying to sell the tapes to the highest bidder. In other words, who gets the breaking documentary will be the media outlet willing to pay the most for it.
I wonder if Bishop Newton has a copy? It would be right up his alley to pimp them out the highest bidder - he'd still be riding that rented mule.
This post was edited on 2/25/11 at 11:14 am
Posted on 2/25/11 at 11:10 am to Monticello
quote:
These tapes are extremely valuable personal property which have little to no value once made public. These 2 are trying to sell the tapes to the highest bidder. In other words, who gets the breaking documentary will be the media outlet willing to pay the most for it.
What?
I'm pretty sure everyone on here was convinced that since the FBI was involved, EVERYTHING was going to come to light.... but now you say they kept these tapes on ice EVEN AFTER the FBI was interrogating them?
Damn... the stories on here change monthly...
Posted on 2/25/11 at 11:11 am to Tds & Beer
quote:
Tds & Beer
U mad?
Page 4 of 37
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News