Mike Slive’s sense of priorities

I’m not a lawyer, although I play one… whoops, almost forgot, I am a lawyer.  That doesn’t mean I grok Mike Slive’s self-serving BS about the Newton decision any better.

“The comments that we need to send a message should not be on the back of a student-athlete under the facts of this case where the established facts show that he was not aware of what his father did and he never received anything,” said Slive, referring to Newton’s father, Cecil Newton, who attempted to shop his son to Mississippi State for $180,000.

“[Cam Newton] is at a different institution than the one the father solicited, and the institution that he’s playing at, there’s no evidence that they did anything wrong. The message is better sent through improved legislation, clarifying and strengthening legislation to deal with this issue, and that’s what we’re going to do within these next few weeks.”

Slive made it clear that he fully supports the NCAA reinstatement committee’s decision.

“They took into consideration the No. 1 priority, which is the welfare of the student-athlete,” Slive said. “That was the No. 1 priority based on the facts of this case.”

That said, Slive agreed that the wording of the current NCAA legislation concerning the solicitation of a player was too vague.

“There’s no doubt that the legislation needs to be clearer so that the conduct of a father or the person involved needs to be made clearly a violation,” Slive said. “Then you work from there, and that’s what we will do. The SEC is anxious to be involved helping to create that legislation.”

What exactly is there to clarify?  Slive takes the position that penalizing the student-athlete is off the table in those cases where the student didn’t directly receive anything and didn’t know that someone else tried to solicit benefits.  And it’s not like the NCAA can regulate family members.  So what does Slive propose be done?  He doesn’t say, but my guess is that we’ll be looking at some meaningless window dressing.

Meanwhile, people much smarter than Cecil Newton will be sitting down trying to devise ways to game the system.  And they’ll succeed, too.  Because we all know what Slive’s No. 1 priority really is.

***********************************************************************

UPDATE: And, gosh, how about this touching quote from the NCAA’s enforcement chief:

“When you’re talking about a National Collegiate Athletic Association, whose primary mission is to serve student-athlete well-being, then generally you land on the side of student-athlete welfare.”

Except at Georgia, where we didn’t land on the side of student-athlete welfare.  Student-athlete welfare landed on us.

About these ads

38 Comments

Filed under SEC Football, The NCAA

38 responses to “Mike Slive’s sense of priorities

  1. JBJ

    [Cam Newton] is at a different institution than the one the father solicited, and the institution that he’s playing at, there’s no evidence that they did anything wrong.

    Wow. The balls on these guys. I think he forgot a key word in that sentence. “..no evidence YET…”

  2. Spike

    The more you stir it the more it stinks. So they buy this nonsense that Newton had no idea that his father was pimping him out to the highest bidder. No idea. Sure.

  3. Kevin

    I know this might be a family blog and all but

    fuck. the. NCAA.

  4. Dawg

    What gets me is the fact the NCAA loosely interprets its bylaws in order to punish when wrong has been done….all the time.
    But now…with this case and all the money involved behind Auburn to succeed…the NCAA is referring to “first impression” and lack of clarity on a bylaw..that is already pretty clear by implication. Outrageous! Why can’t someone sue these guys? (Including the SEC)

  5. jferg

    Senator,
    I see this as “AJ got penalized because he received benefits” whereas “Cam did not because he did not receive benefits”. If that’s the case, seems fair. Right?

    • NRBQ

      I don’t think you can boil down to that simplicity.
      Even if you buy the argument that Cam had no idea what his Diddy was up to:
      By all accounts, A.J. has been an exemplary young man, other than selling personal property to someone he couldn’t be expected to know the NCAA would consider an “agent.”

      Newton, in his one year at Fla, bought stolen property, painted it (so he knew it was hot), chunked it out the window (for 70 yards) when the police showed up, and amassed 13 traffic citations, with repeat charges on some of the offenses.

      As an objective and uninterested observer, to whom would you give the benefit of the doubt?

    • The Realist

      But, if AJ pays back the “received benefits” then there is no difference. He is forced to pay it back AND lose 4 games of eligibility. So… is there a difference between seeking, getting, and paying back versus seeking and not getting to begin with?

      • Mayor of Dawgtown

        Also, AJ gave away the money and did NOT get back his jersey which we now know from the sales of similar player items by UNIVERSITIES was worth about $1000, the amount AJ was paid. So AJ misses 4 games, his school is penalized by loss of his services and AJ is out his property worth $1000. How is that “landing on the side of student-athlete welfare?” I still maintain that AJ’s suspension was illegal and would not survive a court challenge. He did something he had a perfect right to do under the law and the NCAA has no legal right to tell him he cannot do it.

  6. Julie

    He must have been really looking at the welfare for the student-athlete when he denied AJ’s appeal.

  7. gastr1

    Adding to the long line of “what hacks me off”-type sentiments, what hacks ME off about this is the resistance to clarifying that this really comes down to whether money changed hands or not. Just come clean, you arseholes: You couldn’t find the money, and if you had, it wouldn’t matter one whit what Lil’ Cammy Newton did or didn’t know.

  8. AthensHomerDawg

    “Except at Georgia, where we didn’t land on the side of student-athlete welfare. Student-athlete welfare landed on us.”….I know I’ve heard something similar to this before.

  9. Sep

    Cam is a very talented guy but it appears his heritage is full of money hungry dudes like Cecil. The ruling is total bs because there is no way this kid didn’t know. He isn’t some untainted young man.

    I am most pissed because AJ got screwed as well as UGA. I hope Auburn gets whacked in the balls.

    • Mayor of Dawgtown

      +1. Also, if the cheating at Florida, the stolen laptop and the repeated traffic violations don’t sufficiently convince everyone of the mindset of this guy, then the “Cammie Cam Juice” double enterdre sexual innuendo stunt he pulled on national TV at the SECCG should. The guy is the lowest form of human scum there is and definitely knew that his Ol’ Man was shopping him around. “The money’s too much” comment told it all. For the NCAA and Slime..er..Slive to say that the “established facts” show that Cam Newton did not know about the MSU offer defies belief.

  10. Go Dawgs!

    The Georgia situation with AJ is not really comparable with the Cam situation in my eyes. AJ was guilty and we think he was overpunished. On Cam, here is what we know: Cam is a thief, stealing a laptop at worst or knowingly receiving stolen property at best. He is lucky he was in Gainesville and not in Clarke County. Both Florida and Auburn believe in second chances. Fair enough. Cam also is an academic cheat, apparently cheating at UF multiple times. Instead of hearing explanation or investigation, Auburn says he is ineligible and the SEC is more concerned about who leaked it. Cam Newton’s dad solicited money from MSU. We knew in advance because MSU players told us Cam said he was going to Auburn because the money was better. Even if they lied, Cam seems to have had to know something. The NCAA tells us Cam is eligible. Something is wrong.

  11. No One Knows You're a Dawg

    One facet of the problem is that there is a bubble economy in athletics in general and in college football in particular. As Cam (allegedly) said, “The money’s just too much.” I don’t know how this problem gets solved.

  12. DiploDawg

    +1 for the Senator’s Robert Heinlein reference.

  13. Normaltown Mike

    He knows this stinks to high heavens. Put once a shill, always a shill.

    If student athlete protection is paramount, than family members on the take and dirty boosters can do whatever they dream provided the university and the athlete are unaware.

    By Slimes “logic”, if a school pays the family of a player and player doesn’t know, then he remains eligible, school is punished and Pop can’t go to the Senior Banquet.

    Further, if Cam is A-Ok b/c he “didn’t know” and NCAA has no evidence that Auburn was dirty, then why would he suggest that some rules need tweaking? If athlete welfare is the default, why be concerned with crooked family if the athlete can profess plausible deniability?

  14. almightytmc1

    “The comments that we need to send a message should not be on the back of a student-athlete under the facts of this case where the established facts show that he was not aware of what his father did and he never received anything,”
    ____________________________________
    So when did the Denial of a proven thief and the credibility of a lying , recanting preacher man become “established facts?

  15. almightytmc1

    “The message is better sent through improved legislation, clarifying and strengthening legislation to deal with this issue, and that’s what we’re going to do within these next few weeks.”

    _____________________
    And hey I have a novel idea. Why dont we enforce the fucking rules that are already there?

  16. almightytmc1

    “They took into consideration the No. 1 priority, which is the welfare of the student-athlete,” Slive said. “That was the No. 1 priority based on the facts of this case.”
    _____________________-
    And what about the hundreds of other athletes who werent on the Hiesman list?
    Oh and what aoub the hundred’s of other “student-athletes who may have had thier bowl pictures and conference standing skewed by your importence?

  17. $1000 is infinitely more than $0

    • Mayor of Dawgtown

      WTF is that supposed to mean? If AJ sold his car for market value would he have been suspended? Selling his jersey, his property, is EXACTLY the same thing. Beyond that, my comment is that $1000 is exactly $179,000 less than $180,000.

    • gastr1

      Keep it up, Ward. The gods have smiled on you pretty broadly thus far. But keep tempting that fate, keep rolling that die, keep whistling past that graveyard.

    • Ward Smeagol

      Me precious MNC…..me precious…we’re not Alabama’s afterbirth….me precious MNC….he bought the laptop for a “good deal”….me precious….5-19 at Iowa State, he was rebuilding….Cecil never told Cam….me precious

    • Wart Eagle

      It matters not if Cam took a few (perhaps a few thousand) dollars from Bobby Louder. Mr. Louder was just trying to help the young man resurrect his life by removing the temptation to take property belonging to others due to his humble financial circumstances. Now repeat after me: Cam is good. Cam is good. Cam is good. Cam is god. Cam is god. Cam is god. All worship at the alter of Cam. Ummmm…..Ummmm…..Ummmm……………

    • almightytmc1

      No Ward.
      I realise your higher education at The University of Auburn might not have covered this. But the rest of us learned that 1,000 is most definitely a FINITE number by the time we were in middle school.
      You know what folks, you cant make stuff like this up.
      I have always held the belief that a University of Auburn Degree was useless and Ward just reaffirmed that belief.
      Thanks Ward!!!!!

    • Macallanlover

      I have said all along, the only thing scummier than the Auburn boosters/coaches are the fans who not only overlook the wrongdoing, but go all over the country via media and the internet to defend and endorse the cheating.

      Ward, how do you look yourself in the mirror knowing you have sold your principles and integrity? Do you have children? Would you deliberately raise them to lack character and integrity just to get ahead (temporarily) in life? Because that is what this is all about. Every program has problems and bad behavior, the difference is in how they handle the problems and the standards they set. I think The aU is approaching an all-time low.

  18. aious

    Slive is setting himself and the NCAA/SEC up to be mocked HEAVILY when someone else gets caught and they suspend him

    I suspect this player may not be on a top-tier team OR a team that is undefeated at the time thus people will claim that you MUST be highly ranked to be let go

  19. tard eagle

    This sume up how thw whole situation has been dealt with to date, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkQ1f85kiME

  20. Krautdawg

    Silly Senator, they support only the welfare of the _student_ athlete. And we all know that the only “student” athletes are pure, lilly-white amateurs. Thus, when AJ received money for his jersey, he was no longer a “student” athlete. He was an entrepreneur-athlete, a heretic against the church of amateurism (whose 3 years of penance had not passed). He should have contented himself with _studying_ business like a student-athlete, not engaging in business like a business student. Got it?

    And paying the money back does not change any of this. That was a refund, which we all know is a common business practice.

    Now Cam, on the other hand, has never sullied himself with a profit motive. As long as you (like the NCAA) ignore principles of agency, he never had an agent shopping him around to schools. Thus, thankfully, the person who shopped him around, and to whom he delegated his enrollment decision, was not his agent. Ergo, whence, and therefore, Cam remains a lilly-white amateur “student” athlete. The NCAA _must_ act in his interests.

    Anyone else hope Wikileaks finds a box of SEC-NCAA correspondence on its doorstep tomorrow morning?

  21. Bryant Denny

    Actually, the SEC’s number one priority is this: Take the money. And run.

    I would like to know what actually caused Newton to become ineligible last week. Has anyone ever said?

    • Mayor Of Dawgtown

      My feeble understanding is that Auburn declared him ineligible to comport with the letter of the Rule (“if any student-athlete OR MEMBER OF HIS FAMILY”…..asks for money, etc.) and then the NCAA, in its benevolence, reinstated him. Essentially they let him go for time served, which was one day. Just good luck for Cammie and Auburn that the one day he was ineligible happened to be a day when there was no game. What a coincidence! Did I explain that right, Senator?

  22. almightytmc1

    Nice assist by the NCAA and the SEC.
    when my son starts his recruitment, i will make sure tha he and the university dont know I am pimping him out.

  23. almightytmc1

    So Cecil asked MSu for $180,000 and didnt ask Auburn for a thing. BULLSHIT.