Started By
Message
re: Poll: Play for the MNC with a cheater vs keeping your current team
Posted on 12/5/10 at 10:53 pm to crimson crazy
Posted on 12/5/10 at 10:53 pm to crimson crazy
quote:
Have you ever stopped to think there may be more to this than just Cam and Cecil? The NCAA is still investigating. That's not good.
Obviously they are still investigating. They want to find out if AU paid him. With them coming out and stating he is eligible right now means they haven't found one iota of evidence to suggest he was paid.
They may find something but why would they have reinstated Cam if they knew they would bust him before long?
2
Posted on 12/5/10 at 10:54 pm to oklahogjr
quote:
I'd take this years team and consider us a success.
I finally can agree with a hog.
Posted on 12/5/10 at 10:54 pm to flippin stick
quote:
a)
if u hadnt won a nc in over 50 years... the answer is A..
That was refreshingly honest. That's sort of what I was thinking...Posted on 12/5/10 at 10:55 pm to TiggerWoods
quote:
They may find something but why would they have reinstated Cam if they knew they would bust him before long?
Again, there may be more to this than Cecil and Cam. I know it sometimes feels like Cam is the only player on the team, but there are actually a lot more players than just him.
Posted on 12/5/10 at 10:55 pm to Bellabama
quote:
What about those of us who heard about stuff before Tuna's thread? Are you saying the NCAA said he cheated because of what Emmert read on TD??
What about those of us who are connected to people who are actually working on the case?
Again, this isn't really a thread for discussing the legitimacy Blue Tuna's thread, dear.
Apprently every bammer on the planet knows someone working on the case, dear. Bammers know more about the situation than Cam does
Posted on 12/5/10 at 10:56 pm to TiggerWoods
quote:
Apprently every bammer on the planet knows someone working on the case, dear. Bammers know more about the situation than Cam does
This post was edited on 12/5/10 at 10:57 pm
Posted on 12/5/10 at 10:57 pm to TiggerWoods
quote:
Obviously they are still investigating. They want to find out if AU paid him. With them coming out and stating he is eligible right now means they haven't found one iota of evidence to suggest he was paid.
It doesn't mean this. Look at the Textbook scenario with Alabama. Our players were declared eligible starting with the Tennessee game... we had to vacate wins prior to this.
I can tell you that it's not that they don't have evidence... they are looking for more solid evidence. There is a big difference. Things aren't so black and white.
Posted on 12/5/10 at 10:58 pm to crimson crazy
quote:
Again, there may be more to this than Cecil and Cam. I know it sometimes feels like Cam is the only player on the team, but there are actually a lot more players than just him.
LOL I guess you are reading the Dyer and Trovon Reed rumors and believing every word like you believed Tuna's every word.
Posted on 12/5/10 at 10:58 pm to TiggerWoods
Can't really help it if Alabama is the state school with the law school...
Posted on 12/5/10 at 10:59 pm to TiggerWoods
I'm not referring to any player in particular. This wasn't the purpose of the thread anyway. Stay on topic! 
This post was edited on 12/5/10 at 10:59 pm
Posted on 12/5/10 at 11:00 pm to TiggerWoods
quote:
TiggerWoods
Why can't you just let people vote? Go to another thread to argue your same tired points.
Posted on 12/5/10 at 11:00 pm to Bellabama
quote:
It doesn't mean this. Look at the Textbook scenario with Alabama. Our players were declared eligible starting with the Tennessee game... we had to vacate wins prior to this.
I can tell you that it's not that they don't have evidence... they are looking for more solid evidence. There is a big difference. Things aren't so black and white.
This is from Emmert's quote. I think he is saying otherwise.
Based on the information available to the reinstatement staff at this time, we do not have sufficient evidence that Cam Newton or anyone from Auburn was aware of this activity, which led to his reinstatement. From a student-athlete reinstatement perspective, Auburn University met its obligation under NCAA bylaw 14.11.1. Under this threshold, the student-athlete has not participated while ineligible.”
Posted on 12/5/10 at 11:01 pm to crimson crazy
Are you laughing at what you know about me or at his comment?
Posted on 12/5/10 at 11:01 pm to Bellabama
Nothing I can or could have done will influence whether or not they take it away later. That being said, I'm trying to enjoy this season as much as I can. I won't ever get a chance to watch a perfect season as a senior here again, so why not?
Posted on 12/5/10 at 11:01 pm to TiggerWoods
Sufficient evidence doesn't mean no evidence, dumbass.
Posted on 12/5/10 at 11:02 pm to TiggerWoods
quote:
Based on the information available to the reinstatement staff at this time, we do not have sufficient evidence
I'd say she is right.
Posted on 12/5/10 at 11:02 pm to TiggerWoods
quote:
Bammers know more about the situation than Cam does
Well, isn't that y'alls defense?
"Cam didn't know."
Oh, and I choose B.
Posted on 12/5/10 at 11:03 pm to Bellabama
quote:
Are you laughing at what you know about me or at his comment?
Laughing at his comments, based on what I know about you.
Posted on 12/5/10 at 11:03 pm to TiggerWoods
quote:
I think he is saying otherwise
I think you have reading comprehension problems.
quote:
sufficient evidence
meaning, some, but not enough yet.
quote:
at this time
meaning, there's enough that they're continuing to dig.
Auburn.
Double barrel.
It's coming.
Posted on 12/5/10 at 11:04 pm to Mantis Toboggan MD
It's like meeting someone who sweeps you off your feet, having an amazing weekend, and then hearing she's a huge slut who fricked the football team, and waiting to find out if it was true.
Page 2 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News