Started By
Message
re: Why would MSU not tell SEC about telephone conversations...
Posted on 11/11/10 at 10:31 am to Toddy
Posted on 11/11/10 at 10:31 am to Toddy
quote:
Why would MSU not tell SEC about telephone conversations...
quote:
So MSU reports it to the SEC in January because they have to and then wait 6-7 months to respnd to the SEC's request for more information and then when MSU responds to that request they still fail to mention that one of their coaches talked to Cam and Cam told the coach "the money was too much" at Auburn and you say it doesn't matter because the SEC is not an investigative body? I just don't follow your logic. Seems like a pretty important detail to leave out of your mandatory reporting requirement ot the SEC.
Exactly. It's very obvious that State is trying to cover something up.
Two things here:
1. MSU was without an AD for about six weeks or so during this stretch. Once Stricklin gets his shite moved into the new office I'm sure he wants to get his ducks in a row before pursuing this situation.
2. I doubt MSU really trusts the SEC (as opposed to the NCAA) when it comes to handling something like this. Esp considering history with cowbells, Stans officiating complaints/fines and several other occasions where MSU is left to twist in the wind by the conference. I could see Slive sitting on this info whereas the NCAA would give it a thorough look-see.
2
Posted on 11/11/10 at 10:32 am to XbengalTiger
quote:
The better question is... If Cam and his family are totally innocent, why aren't they screaming from the mountain top that this is all 100% BS? Cam said he was not going to say if he did or did not do anything wrong and that he is blessed. His dad will only say that he supports his son. I know damn well if I was being wrongly accused of something like this I would be screaming from the mountain tops that this is a total fabrication.
I think Cam said he would not verify accusations about his multiple academic fraud incidents while a student at UF. Said he didn't want to beat a dead horse, or something to that effect.....
Posted on 11/11/10 at 10:34 am to stevo1a
quote:It's not a very sound theory, but you are the first MSU poster to address the point, so I give you credit for that.
2. I doubt MSU really trusts the SEC (as opposed to the NCAA) when it comes to handling something like this. Esp considering history with cowbells, Stans officiating complaints/fines and several other occasions where MSU is left to twist in the wind by the conference. I could see Slive sitting on this info whereas the NCAA would give it a thorough look-see.
BTW, I am not assuming anything about MSU, it just seems very odd and I can't think of a good reason why they wouldn't have shared this with the SEC.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 10:45 am to WDE24
It is strange the SEC wants to go out of its way to say they didn't know about any phone conversations, and it is also strange that State went out of its way to say once the NCAA became involved they fully cooperated with the investigation.
I don't think it is a stretch to say the SEC and State had some kind of issue with each other along the way.
I don't think it is a stretch to say the SEC and State had some kind of issue with each other along the way.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 11:02 am to MOT
quote:Ok, but they sent 2 reports to the SEC, why leave out the most important piece of the story?
I don't think it is a stretch to say the SEC and State had some kind of issue with each other along the way.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 11:08 am to WDE24
quote:
Ok, but they sent 2 reports to the SEC, why leave out the most important piece of the story?
That's the question. Is the whole thing about phone conversations just made up? Did State not trust the SEC with all of the information and just wanted to stall until the NCAA was involved?
Posted on 11/11/10 at 12:03 pm to MOT
I think this is one of those things where people (from the public and media) are confused because they are now getting second hand accounts of what was and wasn't said months ago
What would MSU report to the SEC in January if they didn't tell them about the "money was too much" quote? Did they just pick up a phone and say... "look we really wanted this guy, we thought we had him... and at the last second he went to Auburn".
That wouldn't seem like much of a report. A verbal allegation of him saying "the money was too much to pass up" is still not much in the way of substance (it's suspicious but doesn't stand alone as evidence)
So if I had to guess I'd guess that they provided a verbal and/or written account of Cam and/or his father saying they couldn't pass up the money. If they have that on tape they probably passed that along in Jan or July too... if there are no tapes then obviously they only have the hearsay
And no matter what (tapes or no tapes) that stuff won't stand alone as proof of wrongdoing without demonstrating some sort of paper trail in Auburn IMO... so yeah it takes a while to investigate for the SEC or NCAA
What would MSU report to the SEC in January if they didn't tell them about the "money was too much" quote? Did they just pick up a phone and say... "look we really wanted this guy, we thought we had him... and at the last second he went to Auburn".
That wouldn't seem like much of a report. A verbal allegation of him saying "the money was too much to pass up" is still not much in the way of substance (it's suspicious but doesn't stand alone as evidence)
So if I had to guess I'd guess that they provided a verbal and/or written account of Cam and/or his father saying they couldn't pass up the money. If they have that on tape they probably passed that along in Jan or July too... if there are no tapes then obviously they only have the hearsay
And no matter what (tapes or no tapes) that stuff won't stand alone as proof of wrongdoing without demonstrating some sort of paper trail in Auburn IMO... so yeah it takes a while to investigate for the SEC or NCAA
Posted on 11/11/10 at 12:56 pm to molsusports
Why is it hard to understand that there are several logical reasonings for this including that SEC is corrupt as hell.
1) The SEC is corrupt, and anyone thinking any differently is kidding themselves. They are not going to allow a program like Auburn to go down if they can help it seeing Auburn's history as cheaters would net them huge sanctions.
2) MSU didn't have knowledge of the recorded voicemails/tapes that could later corroborate those conversations that the recruiters/coaches are claiming to have had. Thus, it would be putting hearsay in the reports. Now those are being found to exist, and they are comfortable coming out with that information. That's not a stretch seeing as the Newton's seem like they'd be stupid enough to call random boosters trying to grease their palms and even stupider to leave a voicemail.
3) We have no official statement from the SEC on these things. This is all based on a random report claiming an SEC spokesman claimed this, yet he is never quoted which I find hilarious. Auburn fans are clinging on to a paraphrase of what spokesman supposedly said to attack MSU.
People also choose to ignore the realistic fact that MSU gave the information at hand to the SEC initially and continued their investigations over the next several months. They wanted to get all their ducks in a row on the Camgate stuff before giving the reports/info to the corrupt SEC.
1) The SEC is corrupt, and anyone thinking any differently is kidding themselves. They are not going to allow a program like Auburn to go down if they can help it seeing Auburn's history as cheaters would net them huge sanctions.
2) MSU didn't have knowledge of the recorded voicemails/tapes that could later corroborate those conversations that the recruiters/coaches are claiming to have had. Thus, it would be putting hearsay in the reports. Now those are being found to exist, and they are comfortable coming out with that information. That's not a stretch seeing as the Newton's seem like they'd be stupid enough to call random boosters trying to grease their palms and even stupider to leave a voicemail.
3) We have no official statement from the SEC on these things. This is all based on a random report claiming an SEC spokesman claimed this, yet he is never quoted which I find hilarious. Auburn fans are clinging on to a paraphrase of what spokesman supposedly said to attack MSU.
People also choose to ignore the realistic fact that MSU gave the information at hand to the SEC initially and continued their investigations over the next several months. They wanted to get all their ducks in a row on the Camgate stuff before giving the reports/info to the corrupt SEC.
This post was edited on 11/11/10 at 1:06 pm
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:00 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:32 pm to molsusports
quote:That someone claiming to represent Cam tried to extort money.
What would MSU report to the SEC in January if they didn't tell them about the "money was too much" quote? Did they just pick up a phone and say... "look we really wanted this guy, we thought we had him... and at the last second he went to Auburn".
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:34 pm to WDE24
right, they had to report something along those lines
there is no report if there is no allegation of improper behavior
there is no report if there is no allegation of improper behavior
Posted on 11/11/10 at 2:04 pm to stevo1a
Interestingly enough, the “non-football issue” was Renardo Sidney, a MS State basketball player that was declared ineligible by the NCAA for…………you guessed it, receiving improper benefits.
So yes, I guess MSU has been quite busy...
So yes, I guess MSU has been quite busy...
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News