Started By
Message
re: This is all about the NCAA saving face
Posted on 12/1/10 at 4:27 pm to accnodefense
Posted on 12/1/10 at 4:27 pm to accnodefense
quote:
I am a TCU fan though and I let my feelings known in another topic and I will post it here:
I and other fans are fine with playing in the Rose Bowl(absolutely nothing wrong with that) and Auburn being in the championship game as long as Auburn is clean. Auburn has done much more than we have and our body of work when scrutinized is not impressive. Auburn deserves to be there over us based on what they have done on the field.
I'm glad you are taking the Christian approach cause I threw that fricking shite out the door about 10 a.m. this morning. MSU has been the one who just took it for far too long. I am sick of taking it. I am sick of seeing us get shafted and nothing happening to the big boys cause that the way it is. You may want to consider that as long as you lay there and take it they are going to continue giving it to you.
1
Posted on 12/1/10 at 4:30 pm to accnodefense
Understandable
and welcome
and welcome
Posted on 12/1/10 at 4:34 pm to MaroonNation
quote:
I'm glad you are taking the Christian approach cause I threw that fricking shite out the door about 10 a.m. this morning. MSU has been the one who just took it for far too long. I am sick of taking it. I am sick of seeing us get shafted and nothing happening to the big boys cause that the way it is. You may want to consider that as long as you lay there and take it they are going to continue giving it to you.
It sucks but what can you do? Circumstantial evidence points to Cam Newton knowing what was going on. It's like OJ Simpson - just can't be proven 100%. It's not hard to connect the dots. I think even Auburn fans themselves know he is guilty but know he is getting away with it because the burden of proof isn't there. They are celebrating him getting away with it(for now), not the fact he isn't guilty of what he is being accused of.
If someone held a gun to my head and told me to tell the truth about Cam Newton, and he would shoot me dead if I was wrong, I would say that yeah, he or his dad took money to play for Auburn. I am sure most Auburn fans would do the same.
Posted on 12/1/10 at 4:34 pm to MaroonNation
quote:Have there been any reports of this outside of message board speculation to confirm that?
The NCAA knew all the facts prior to AU playing UGA ans suggested AU sit Cam, they refused
Posted on 12/1/10 at 4:48 pm to PJinAtl
The NCAA hasn't stated publicaly because they are still in the midst of this investigation but it was widely accepted by the national sports reporting media that the NCAA had this conversation. When Vegas pulls the line on a game and then doesn't allow further betting something happened.
Posted on 12/1/10 at 4:53 pm to accnodefense
quote:
However it would really suck if Reggie Bush is guilty and the NCAA is just sweeping all of this under the rug right now and then a few years later USC ends up getting it. Yeah, USC gets punished, but there is no way you can make up for keeping Auburn out of the title game in 2004 in favor of a team that blatantly cheated.
FIFY. Oh wait...
Posted on 12/1/10 at 4:57 pm to TheDoc
quote:me too,the NCAA is all about the benjamins,they know what they're doing letting him play....
Something tells me this whole thing is gonna get really bad
Posted on 12/1/10 at 5:12 pm to accnodefense
It looks like a negotiated deal in which the NCAA got a concession from Auburn on an interpretation of the rules and in return agreed to an instant reinstatement pending further investigation.
The NCAA originally overstated it's case when it said that "solicitation" alone violated it's rules when the actual language wasn't entirely clear on that issue (reading something along the lines of "receives or agrees to receive"). I think that Auburn originally took the position that the "agrees to receive" part required an agreement between the parties so that a solicitation that was rejected would not amount to agreeing to receive a benefit. Reasonable minds could disagree about how to apply that language to the facts as alleged by Auburn. It looks like Auburn conceded this point of interpretation, declared Cam ineligible, and got virtually instant reinstatement. The NCAA actually gave up very little to get that concession and remains free to take any action it sees fit if it finds that things did not happen in the way that Auburn, Cam, and Cecil allege.
The NCAA originally overstated it's case when it said that "solicitation" alone violated it's rules when the actual language wasn't entirely clear on that issue (reading something along the lines of "receives or agrees to receive"). I think that Auburn originally took the position that the "agrees to receive" part required an agreement between the parties so that a solicitation that was rejected would not amount to agreeing to receive a benefit. Reasonable minds could disagree about how to apply that language to the facts as alleged by Auburn. It looks like Auburn conceded this point of interpretation, declared Cam ineligible, and got virtually instant reinstatement. The NCAA actually gave up very little to get that concession and remains free to take any action it sees fit if it finds that things did not happen in the way that Auburn, Cam, and Cecil allege.
Posted on 12/1/10 at 5:14 pm to GeauxTigersLee
quote:
NCAA reinstated today
Based on info that the SCHOOL REQUESTING REINSTATEMENT provides. Who knows what/if everything was given??? Food for thought ... and don't shoot me -- just passing on a thought from a previous post.
Posted on 12/1/10 at 5:21 pm to LRHogFan
quote:
It looks like a negotiated deal in which the NCAA got a concession from Auburn on an interpretation of the rules and in return agreed to an instant reinstatement pending further investigation.
The legalese is understandable but it just adds credence to the fact the AU knew all along that he was questionable as far as eligability went and continued to play him. The whole, Cam Newton is eligable to play football at Auburn today statement was a lie offically endorsed and released by the university
This post was edited on 12/1/10 at 5:25 pm
Posted on 12/1/10 at 5:25 pm to MaroonNation
quote:
MaroonNation
"Mississippi State has disassociated the involved individual"
========================================
That statement is what you should be concerned with not what is happening with Aubun and Cam. A Booster who was associated with MSU has now been disasscoiated. WHY? What did the booster do wrong? Institutional control? Keep looking over your shoulder they are coming.
Posted on 12/1/10 at 5:28 pm to LRHogFan
quote:
It looks like a negotiated deal in which the NCAA got a concession from Auburn on an interpretation of the rules and in return agreed to an instant reinstatement pending further investigation.
This is not obviously the type of case that wouldn't come before a jury, but hypothetically speaking, if you were representing AU in the case of Cam's eligability, what process would you use to establish his eligability and what do you honestly think a jury's verdict would be?
Posted on 12/1/10 at 5:35 pm to RockyMtnTigerWDE
quote:
Mississippi State has disassociated the involved individual"
========================================
Since they don't establish the identity of said individual, if it's Kenny Rogers, MSU never had an official relationship with him, if Bill Bell then he is not a school sanctioned booster and if it is John Bond then he did the right thing to turn it in to the school and the school took it to the SEC who sat on it. I am assuming Bill Bell is the person in question as Rogers has had no formal contact with school since he graduated other than being there with Cecil when cecil asked for money. As per Cecil Newton's own words he had to introduce him to Mullen as Kenny Rogers, a former MSU player. John Bond is very involoved in MSU and he did nothing wrong. He was the whistle blower who alerted the school. Bill Bell is no more of a booster than I am, except I don't have Bell type money.
Posted on 12/1/10 at 5:42 pm to TheDoc
quote:It seems pretty simple to me. This whole Cam thing has grown too big. You can't take down Cam without taking down Auburn, Miss. St. and probably Fla.
This is all about the NCAA saving face
That's why I said a month ago that nothing would happen. I knew they'd use every creative legalize they could come up with to sweep this under the rug.
It's disgusting, but big business, which college football certainly is, is pretty slimy.
I think Cam is as innocent as I think O.J. is.
ETA: LegalTiger beat me to it.
This post was edited on 12/1/10 at 5:45 pm
Posted on 12/1/10 at 6:13 pm to TX Tiger
there is a lot of money to lose if cam is declared ineligible (again)
Posted on 12/1/10 at 6:58 pm to MaroonNation
quote:
This is not obviously the type of case that wouldn't come before a jury, but hypothetically speaking, if you were representing AU in the case of Cam's eligability, what process would you use to establish his eligability and what do you honestly think a jury's verdict would be?
I don't know details on the procedures. From an article I ran across on the Reggie Bush deal, it sounds like the NCAA negotiates findings with the school to narrow the issues in dispute. In areas of disagreement, the NCAA makes its own findings and then decides on what,if any, penalties to impose. I don't know what the procedures might be for appeal or review. I'm pretty sure that the burden is on the NCAA to show ineligibiity and not on the school to show eligibility.
If the question is just a hypothetical, of whether I think a jury would believe Cecil and Cam's version of what allegedly happened, I would have to say no, their changing story sounds concocted and improbable. Since they wouldn't bear the burden of proof, the outcome would depend on whether there was any evidence to rebut their story. In my mind, it wouldn't take much evidence to rebut a changed story that sounded concocted and improbable.
This post was edited on 12/1/10 at 7:03 pm
Posted on 12/1/10 at 6:59 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
quote:
It was proved Cecil asked for $. Cecil admitted to it. The fact that this isn't enough is terrifying for the future of college football.
This.
Posted on 12/1/10 at 7:22 pm to MaroonNation
quote:
The whole, Cam Newton is eligable to play football at Auburn today statement was a lie offically endorsed and released by the university
I think of a "lie" as a misrepresentation of fact and not a disagreement over an interpretation of a rule. The Auburn statement looks like a carefully crafted one that was probably intended to subtlely mask that they were relying on their interpretation of the rules and not on a denial that Cecil shopped Cam around.
Posted on 12/1/10 at 7:32 pm to LRHogFan
quote:
I think of a "lie" as a misrepresentation of fact and not a disagreement over an interpretation of a rule. The Auburn statement looks like a carefully crafted one that was probably intended to subtlely mask that they were relying on their interpretation of the rules and not on a denial that Cecil shopped Cam around.
I seriously think AU had some good lawyers on there side. They found a gap in NCAA rules and exploited it. On a side note, Cam will have a NCAA rule named after him in the near future.
Posted on 12/1/10 at 7:37 pm to MaroonNation
quote:
the biggest NCAA sanctioned arse-fricking of your life! I hope it pisses you of cause it should.
I don't think this is the case, but I will play along and assume it is for this thread's purposes:
This is called KARMA. Remember 2004? Some cheating team won and another team was denied. Maybe this is Auburn calling that chip in? That would explain it given your assumption that the NCAA is totally corrupt.
EDIT: This post was targeted at the original thread starting post. The quote above explains why this is karma.
This post was edited on 12/1/10 at 7:48 pm
Page 2 of 3
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News