Started By
Message

re: Somebody clear this up

Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:21 pm to
Posted by PJinAtl
Atlanta
Member since Nov 2007
13928 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:21 pm to
According to the SEC statement to the Clarion Ledger, it isn't.

The key being (I guess) that solicitation does not equal agreement.
Posted by tiger81
Brentwood, TN.
Member since Jan 2008
20945 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:21 pm to
SEC Bylaw

14.01.3.2 Financial Aid.
If at any time before or after matriculation in a member institution a student-athlete or any member of his/her family receives or agrees to receive, directly or indirectly, any aid or assistance beyond or in addition to that permitted by the Bylaws of this Conference (except such aid or assistance as such student-athlete may receive from those persons on whom the student is naturally or legally dependent for support), such student-athlete shall be ineligible for competition in any intercollegiate sport within the Conference for the remainder of his/her college career.

Is Cecil Newton Cam Newton’s father? Check


Did Cecil Newton ask Mississippi State for money? Check

If the answer to the above two questions is Yes ( Check ), then Cam Newton is ineligible to play at any SEC School

It is time for Mike Slive and the SEC to step in, but you know they won’t because they want the payout of the BCS National Championship. It has already been proven that this by-law has been broken.
Posted by hwnd
( O_o)
Member since Apr 2010
9624 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:25 pm to
quote:

The key being (I guess) that solicitation does not equal agreement.

That makes about as much sense as it doesn't. Why on earth would someone solicit money from one university, realize it's "not enough", and go to ANOTHER university and NOT accept money?

The logic here makes no sense. He tries to go to MSU, Cecil says it's not enough money. Suddenly, he's at Auburn. So following this logic, I guess $0 > $180,000?

ETA: The SEC is corrupt. The NCAA isn't far behind them.
This post was edited on 12/1/10 at 10:27 pm
Posted by marshallcotiger
Member since Dec 2009
8296 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:31 pm to
quote:

That makes about as much sense as it doesn't. Why on earth would someone solicit money from one university, realize it's "not enough", and go to ANOTHER university and NOT accept money?

The logic here makes no sense. He tries to go to MSU, Cecil says it's not enough money. Suddenly, he's at Auburn. So following this logic, I guess $0 > $180,000?


Everything that has been reported says that MSU made no such offer. It is hard to use logic when your facts are wrong.
Posted by hwnd
( O_o)
Member since Apr 2010
9624 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:32 pm to
quote:

Everything that has been reported says that MSU made no such offer. It is hard to use logic when your facts are wrong.

Uhm, who said MSU DID offer money? I thought it was pretty well documented that he wanted something like $200,000 from MSU, but they declined and reported it. Suddenly, his dad tells him to go to Auburn instead.

Edit: I realized the wording my post was bad. That's where you got that from. My bad.
This post was edited on 12/1/10 at 10:34 pm
Posted by PJinAtl
Atlanta
Member since Nov 2007
13928 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:32 pm to
Or Cecil realizes he screwed up when MSU starts talking about the troubel that could follow if any of this even comes to light whether money is exchanged or not. They show him the provisions that say just the solicitation could make Cam ineligible at MSU. He realizes that they would all be in a world of hurt if Cam goes there so he sends him to Auburn - a place with another high powered spread offense.

As I said in another post, Rogers says he never had contact with Auburn about Cam. Cecil did not make the recruiting trip to AU with Cam. So how did Cecil makecontact with someone about getting money from AU?
Posted by hwnd
( O_o)
Member since Apr 2010
9624 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:35 pm to
I kind of wondered the same thing, honestly. It's very possible that Cecil tried to get cash from MSU, MSU wasn't having it, so he's like, "Oh shite, time to go somewhere else." Maybe he got worried that it could cause some trouble, so he tells Cam that he can't go to MSU (because of shite like what's happening now, only it would be worse there), he's going to Auburn, and there was no hint of asking for cash from AU.
Posted by tiger81
Brentwood, TN.
Member since Jan 2008
20945 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:36 pm to
If he's ineligible at State, he's ineligible at any SEC school... per SEC bylaws above. BOOM.
Posted by PJinAtl
Atlanta
Member since Nov 2007
13928 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:39 pm to
quote:

If he's ineligible at State, he's ineligible at any SEC school... per SEC bylaws above. BOOM
An SEC offcial was quoted in the Clarion Ledger as asying that their interpretation of that rule is there has to be something like a "handshake agreement" and the SEC at this time does not feel what happened in this situation reaches that status.

So BOOM back at you
Posted by Stuttgart Tiger
Branson, MO
Member since Jan 2006
15397 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:41 pm to
quote:

it appears (to me) that solicitation makes one ineligible with regard only to the school that was solicited.


So what is "The Aubbie Reasoning" for why Cecil tried to shop Cam to MSU but decided against shopping him to Aubbie? Is it only because Kenny Rogers wasn't involved at Aubbie?

Did Kenny Rogers corrupt Cecil Newton?
Posted by hwnd
( O_o)
Member since Apr 2010
9624 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:43 pm to
quote:

An SEC offcial was quoted in the Clarion Ledger as asying that their interpretation of that rule is there has to be something like a "handshake agreement" and the SEC at this time does not feel what happened in this situation reaches that status.

Holy shite, the SEC is horribly corrupt. The rule doesn't say anywhere that it has to be something like a "handshake agreement" at all. It says, point blank, even AGREEING to pay (read: not even exchanging money at all) is a violation and makes him ineligible.
Posted by PJinAtl
Atlanta
Member since Nov 2007
13928 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:49 pm to
The thing is, that rule, like so many in our great country, can be interpreted in different ways by those in a position of authority.

The diret quote from the SEC via the Clarion Ledger blog

“SEC Bylaw 14.01.3.2 does not apply in this situation,” SEC spokesman Charles Bloom said in an e-mail to The Clarion-Ledger. “It only applies when there is an actual payment of an improper benefit, or an agreement (such as a handshake agreement) to pay and receive an improper benefit. The facts in this case, as we understand them, are that the
student-athlete’s father, without the knowledge of the student-athlete, solicited improper payments (which were rejected) from an institution the young man did not attend, and that the institution where the young man is enrolled was not involved.”
Posted by Stanky Legg
Member since Sep 2010
4052 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:51 pm to
quote:

sad that SEC won't enforce it's on rules in this case


The SEC doesn't enforce it's own rules all the time.

Rules are there so that they can be selectively enforced, when the enforcer sees fit.

Sucks, but it's true.
Posted by hwnd
( O_o)
Member since Apr 2010
9624 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:54 pm to
That is retarded. They're twisting up their own rule it seems. For instance, they mention Cam not knowing about it as if it matters, when their own law clearly states "... a student-athlete or any member of his/her family receives or agrees to receive...", not just "a student-athlete".

I agree that there was no "payment agreement" which is the only part of their babbling that has any semblance of reasoning, but the latter part you quoted is just flat-out wrong.

What I don't understand is, how can soliciting money from a university by an athlete's family NOT make the player ineligible? Nevermind, I already know where that's gonna go...
Posted by chilld28
Get in B Chord and Mash It!!
Member since Nov 2009
29622 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:55 pm to
But but but Cam didnt know about it
Posted by Cheapseats87
CA
Member since Nov 2010
314 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:57 pm to
This USA TODAY does a good job of explaining how the NCAA works.
Posted by TheChiznit
Sugar Hill, GA
Member since Feb 2010
2191 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:57 pm to
Posted by Stanky Legg
Member since Sep 2010
4052 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:57 pm to
quote:

But but but Cam didnt know about it


Some of us tried to tell the Rant what was up.

The NCAA has been very clear with Auburn about their stance on this from the beginning.
Posted by chilld28
Get in B Chord and Mash It!!
Member since Nov 2009
29622 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 10:59 pm to
I was being sarcastic. He is as guilty as an Auburn fan with goat hair on his junk. That was not sarcastic.
Posted by hwnd
( O_o)
Member since Apr 2010
9624 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 11:01 pm to
quote:

This USA TODAY does a good job of explaining how the NCAA works.

"It determined that his father, Cecil Newton, indeed committed an infraction, leading Auburn to declare the quarterback ineligible and immediately ask the NCAA to reinstate him. There was no evidence Cam was aware of his father's actions or that money changed hands, and so the NCAA reinstated him "without conditions.""

And again we see that.
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 3Next pagelast page

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

FacebookTwitter