Started By
Message
re: As the jar cracks - Johnny Manziel's downfall is upon us
Posted on 8/8/13 at 10:02 am to C
Posted on 8/8/13 at 10:02 am to C
Just out of curiosity because I didn't follow the Cam Newton thing whatsoever, how many of you who think Manziel is done were 100% sure Cam and Auburn were going to get hammered when that news first broke as well?
1
Posted on 8/8/13 at 10:03 am to AUnite
quote:
I'm not re-linking everything in my argument for this. Taping an in-person conversation via video, is not illegal in CT. Only taping private telephone conversations is illegal (without both parties consent). No wiretapping or eavesdropping laws were broken either. According to what I read, that video tape is legal, but it doesn't matter anyways. The NCAA isn't a court of law.
Generally speaking, my understanding is that videotaping in public is legal as long as you're not invading someone's privacy. The obvious example being a public bathroom or from a public street through some ones bedroom window. This was in a hotel room if I remember correct, so I believe the only thing that would change is that whoever was paying for that room would have to agree or consent to the videotaping.
Posted on 8/8/13 at 10:06 am to aggressor
you are completely wrong about the "illegal" video.
Posted on 8/8/13 at 10:06 am to MMB5DAP
quote:
how many of you who think Manziel is done were 100% sure Cam and Auburn were going to get hammered when that news first broke as well
I did. The only reason he wasn't gone is the SEC believed Cam had no knowledge that his dad was selling him.
Posted on 8/8/13 at 10:09 am to JPLSU1981
The "never met me" comment means nothing. If Manziel was doing this on the up and up and signing this stuff for the guy for free he wouldn't want it getting around because he would be hounded by others wanting him to do it. It proves innocence as much as guilt, it's just that most people are going in to the comments and tape ASSUMING guilt instead of innocence. What is he supposed to say? "I love sitting down and signing stuff for strangers, in fact, go out and tell your friends so I can do this all the time."
Is it odd that Johnny agreed to do the signing if he is innocent? Somewhat, but he is an immature kid that likes to please people. You could also assume this broker was bugging him/flattering him and Johnny finally said, "Ok, sure. I'll come sign some stuff for you but don't go tell everyone."
I also don't disagree that Johnny may be guilty as hell but that really doesn't matter much. It's about what can be proven. With the Manziel's and ATM lawyered up and the stakes being so high for everyone I don't see the NCAA handing down punishment on circumstantial evidence. It will have to be irrefutable.
I also can't see what possible sanctions the NCAA could give A&M unless they can show A&M had some complicity in this. As it is there is lots of evidence of A&M sitting down with Johnny on multiple occasions to talk about compliance.
Johnny may well go down but I would be very surprised at this point unless another shoe drops with clear evidence.
Is it odd that Johnny agreed to do the signing if he is innocent? Somewhat, but he is an immature kid that likes to please people. You could also assume this broker was bugging him/flattering him and Johnny finally said, "Ok, sure. I'll come sign some stuff for you but don't go tell everyone."
I also don't disagree that Johnny may be guilty as hell but that really doesn't matter much. It's about what can be proven. With the Manziel's and ATM lawyered up and the stakes being so high for everyone I don't see the NCAA handing down punishment on circumstantial evidence. It will have to be irrefutable.
I also can't see what possible sanctions the NCAA could give A&M unless they can show A&M had some complicity in this. As it is there is lots of evidence of A&M sitting down with Johnny on multiple occasions to talk about compliance.
Johnny may well go down but I would be very surprised at this point unless another shoe drops with clear evidence.
Posted on 8/8/13 at 10:10 am to aggressor
like a "secret witness"? It HAS happened before.
Posted on 8/8/13 at 10:13 am to aggressor
This also has little to do with the Cam situation. Cam's situation had to do with getting money to play for a school. This is about a player being coerced into getting paid to make money off of their own signature. While both are violations they are viewed very differently in the public eye and make no mistake that has a bearing.
The shitstorm of controversy that would hit the NCAA for suspending Manziel over this would be massive even if he is guilty. They might as well concede the O'Bannon case just to start.
The shitstorm of controversy that would hit the NCAA for suspending Manziel over this would be massive even if he is guilty. They might as well concede the O'Bannon case just to start.
Posted on 8/8/13 at 10:15 am to aggressor
quote:How about the Court of Public Opinion?
Hammered in what courts?
Posted on 8/8/13 at 10:16 am to aggressor
200 pages. Almost there
This post was edited on 8/8/13 at 10:17 am
Posted on 8/8/13 at 10:22 am to Jobu93
This post was edited on 8/8/13 at 10:24 am
Posted on 8/8/13 at 10:23 am to aggressor
quote:
The "never met me" comment means nothing... It proves innocence as much as guilt
Wow. You actually deluded yourself into believing that.
Posted on 8/8/13 at 10:25 am to Jobu93
Is JFF still with the first team?
Posted on 8/8/13 at 10:25 am to aggressor
quote:
With the Manziel's and ATM lawyered up and the stakes being so high for everyone I don't see the NCAA handing down punishment on circumstantial evidence. It will have to be irrefutable.
No it doesn't. And what on earth makes the stakes any higher than they were at usc or osu?
The NCAA isn't bound by any burden of proof really. They can kind of do whatever they want. And at any rate, circumstancial evidence is in no way synonomous with bad evidence.
Posted on 8/8/13 at 10:29 am to Herman Frisco
Yes
This post was edited on 8/8/13 at 10:30 am
Posted on 8/8/13 at 10:32 am to JR_Ewing
quote:
How about the Court of Public Opinion?
You mean only Aggies.. right?
There are players who got banned for eating dinner at a house, sell their own property just so they have money to eat (some for tattoos) and others.
This dude selling his autographs so he can party harder and upgrade his luxury car?
Not even close to the same thing.
Posted on 8/8/13 at 10:32 am to aggressor
quote:
This is about a player being coerced into getting paid to make money off of their own signature
"coerced"
Poor innocent johnny, too naive for this big bad world.
This post was edited on 8/8/13 at 10:34 am
Posted on 8/8/13 at 10:36 am to piggidyphish
quote:
coerced
This post was edited on 8/8/13 at 10:38 am
Posted on 8/8/13 at 10:37 am to MrTide33
quote:
200!!!!
you sure about that?
Posted on 8/8/13 at 10:38 am to piggidyphish
No... I missed it 
Posted on 8/8/13 at 10:38 am to CrippleCreek
quote:
The NCAA isn't bound by any burden of proof really. They can kind of do whatever they want. And at any rate, circumstancial evidence is in no way synonomous with bad evidence.
We do people still say this. So sick of hearing it.
No, the NCAA is not a civil or criminal court bound by the standards the courts operate under.
However, to say they are not bound by a burden of proof or they can do whatever they want is ludacris and extremely ignorant.
They have to have reasonable grounds and sufficient evidence to take any action.
Did no one read the letter to Auburn ending the Cam investigation???????????????
It lays it out in very straighforward terms anyone could understand. I suggest people educate themselves by starting with the letter before spouting ignorance and stupidity regarding how the NCAA conducts matters such as these.
Page 199 of 340
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News