Started By
Message
1
Posted on 7/21/11 at 10:00 am to Itsme2011
quote:
ESPN!
frick ESPN. Everyone knows that the only credible source for sports in the entire world is Gregg Doyel.
This post was edited on 7/21/11 at 10:00 am
Posted on 7/21/11 at 10:00 am to beatbammer
quote:
The FBI doesn't give two shits about the recruitment of Cam Newton, roach.
then why did they interview John Bond (for one) about it?
I gave you the link and can give you more from a simple search on the FBI interviewing Bond...
quote:
The FBI is *not* an investigative arm of the National Collegiate Athletics Association. Never has, never will be.
No, but they can turn over anything they find to the NCAA. Are you saying the NCAA can not request a sit down with the FBI??
I go back to my question that not one single Auburn fan has yet to answer. Why would the FBI be involved in the recruitment of Cam Newton?
BTW.. USA today, ESPN..etc... is my source. John Bonds attorney's release to the AP is my source.
Posted on 7/21/11 at 10:01 am to PurpleandGold Motown
quote:
I hope Cecil and Cam never talk and the bagman moves far away.
I'm not moving, but I know how to keep my mouth shut. ALL IN BITCHES!
Posted on 7/21/11 at 10:01 am to cyde
quote:
Everyone knows that the only credible source for sports in the entire world is Gregg Doyel
that's correct, Captain Obvious.
Posted on 7/21/11 at 10:02 am to WDE24
quote:
This is the funniest thing I have ever read.
No, its true and sad.
quote:
but the fact that they investigated so long, left no stone unturned and then failed to prove AU was guilty proves they were guilty of something.
No. IT means they found enough to keep them going. Had Auburn been innocent, they would not have found enough to keep them there this long.
You think saying Auburn wont get any sanctions means their innocent, and that there is no proof. 8 months of investigation means that there is some proof. Whether it will be enough to warrant a guilty verdict remains to be seen. Again, can anyone point out an investigation that took this long that led to no sanctions?
Posted on 7/21/11 at 10:02 am to Itsme2011
quote:I thought Bond's attorney said it was related to rogue agents. Wasn't that the big story of last summer? Wasn't Kenny Rogers or his employer under investigation by the NFL or something like that. I don't remember exactly, but that is what I recall of the top of my head.
Why would the FBI be involved in the recruitment of Cam Newton?
Posted on 7/21/11 at 10:03 am to WDE24
quote:
This is the funniest thing I have ever read. They NCAA may not prove AU is guilty, but the fact that they investigated so long, left no stone unturned and then failed to prove AU was guilty proves they were guilty of something.
LOL.. you don't release findings until you close the case. They are not going to come out and say "oh.. found out you paid a player.. here's your punishment for that one. But we are still investigating more things"
The lack of the NCAA stating they have found something does not mean they have not.... sorry.
Posted on 7/21/11 at 10:04 am to Itsme2011
quote:
Why would the FBI be involved in the recruitment of Cam Newton?
We've partnered up with the FBI years ago. They're making sure the NCAA doesn't find out anything.
Posted on 7/21/11 at 10:05 am to Itsme2011
quote:I think you are too dumb to understand the simplest point, but I am going to try anyway. I was responding to a statement that assumed the investigation ends with no sanctions against Auburn. Therefore, in my response, I used the same assumptions so that my response made sense in context. I hope all of these words joined together in sentences which form a logical thought don't tax your brain too much.
LOL.. you don't release findings until you close the case. They are not going to come out and say "oh.. found out you paid a player.. here's your punishment for that one. But we are still investigating more things"
The lack of the NCAA stating they have found something does not mean they have not.... sorry.
This post was edited on 7/21/11 at 10:06 am
Posted on 7/21/11 at 10:06 am to AUCatfish
quote:
Ok, so John Bond has met with the FBI according to his attorney. Is that is the extent of your proof of FBI involvement and all that entails? One interview?
LOL.. again. please answer the question. Why is the FBI involved? one interview is involvement.... so why?
Posted on 7/21/11 at 10:06 am to DeoreDX
FBI is not involved, quit fapping to this thread
Posted on 7/21/11 at 10:06 am to Itsme2011
quote:
BTW.. USA today, ESPN..etc... is my source.
Yes, reporting based on an article from an entertainment/gossip website.
quote:
John Bonds attorney's release to the AP is my source.
Yes, his attorney released that info, yet the FBI never confirmed they had interviewed him. So, I would assume, that if the FBI is involved in this, they have interviewed many more people involved...who are they?
Posted on 7/21/11 at 10:08 am to Itsme2011
quote:
The lack of the NCAA stating they have found something does not mean they have not.... sorry.
nor does it mean that they nessasrily have.....sorry.
can someone get the can of raid and chase itsme2011 back to the ATPB thread pls?
Posted on 7/21/11 at 10:09 am to beatbammer
quote:
The FBI doesn't give two shits about the recruitment of Cam Newton, roach. Get that through your head. The FBI is *not* an investigative arm of the National Collegiate Athletics Association. Never has, never will be.
You may be a tad off base with this. You may be right about the FBI not being interested in the recruitment of Cam but they may have thought the NCAA would be interested in some of the evidence they have uncovered. Until the trial is over in Montgomery, I would be surprised to hear any evidence the FBI might have let the NCAA be privy to would to be leaked out.
Posted on 7/21/11 at 10:10 am to Thracken13
quote:
itsme2011
He's got Alzheimers...go easy on him.
Posted on 7/21/11 at 10:11 am to DeoreDX
quote:
quote:
quote:
BTW.. USA today, ESPN..etc... is my source. John Bonds attorney's release to the AP is my source.
LINK
So you are saying that Milton's lawyer saying he hasn't done anything wrong means anything? Did you think that he was going to come out and say "yeah.. he did"
Posted on 7/21/11 at 10:11 am to Itsme2011
quote:
then why did they interview John Bond (for one) about it?
When you give a "for one" you usally need a second example. otherwise it's just unnecessary.
Posted on 7/21/11 at 10:11 am to Thracken13
I have a question for Auburn fans.
Are ya'll the least bit nervous about this investigation? If the NCAA considered LSU's violations to be 'major' then they will lower the boom on AU if everything being reported is deemed to be true.
I personally would be dreading the outcome
Are ya'll the least bit nervous about this investigation? If the NCAA considered LSU's violations to be 'major' then they will lower the boom on AU if everything being reported is deemed to be true.
I personally would be dreading the outcome
Page 42 of 53
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News