What cocknfire said.
Filed under The NCAA
Hoping something is true or false, without any facts, does not make it so, no matter how much you want it to be. That goes for everybody in this story.
Here’s one truth for you: Cecil Newton shopped his kid at Mississippi State. Even Auburn admits that.
Here’s something else that’s true: the NCAA’s ruling creates a hole in its amateurism regs big enough to drive a Mack semi through.
Those are facts, friend. Take off your orange and blue colored glasses for a second and realize that it’s a much bigger problem than Cam and Auburn.
Did I deny that Cecil shopped his kid to Miss. St? No, all the parties involved have agreed that those are the facts. There’s not much point in debating that.
Whether there is a loophole or not is not a fact. What is factual about it? We’re talking about interpretation of rules, not facts. Do you know the difference? I actually think there is a loophole, but that does not make it fact. Neither you nor I know the impact of this loophole, there’s just speculation at this point.
I’m mainly talking about you and people on this site and others that jump to conclusions that Auburn has violated NCAA regulations, etc. You have absolutely no facts to back your assertions, only wishful thinking. Please point me to any facts that implicate Auburn in wrongdoing here. There are none at this point that I know of.
However, like any case, should *facts* come to light that Auburn did something wrong, it should be punished. Those are not orange and blue glasses, that’s just wanted facts to be presented, not wishful thinking that is taken as fact.
I’m mainly talking about you and people on this site and others that jump to conclusions that Auburn has violated NCAA regulations, etc. You have absolutely no facts to back your assertions, only wishful thinking. Please point me to any facts that implicate Auburn in wrongdoing here.
Please point me to where I’ve made a bald assertion that Auburn has violated NCAA regulations.
If you aren’t accusing Auburn of violating any rules, why do you think there was an injustice committed, because that is clearly your tone? The only way I can fathom someone being annoyed by this ruling, as you clearly are, is if they are convinced that Auburn cheated.
I have no idea if Auburn cheated. But I do know that Cecil Newton did, and it violated NCAA amateurism regs.
As for what I’m annoyed about, read my rebuttal to Barnhart’s post.
Check the URL (the thingy at the top of this page) this isn’t Tigerdroppings.
The question of fact has ALWAYS been about Cam Newton’s eligibility. The NCAA now proves what that evil anti-Auburn Hebrew Joe Schad reported, to wit: Cecil asked for $$ from MSU. By a careful reading of the oft quoted NCAA reg, this makes Cam ineligible. The fact that Slive and the SEC convinced the NCAA to treat this as a case of first impression b/c Cam went to a school other than the tainted one is novel but cravenly problematic.
Was there rampant speculating by “Shane” in Montgomery on Paul’s show and “Deaux Boy 88” at Tigerdroppings that Auburn had paid Cam? Well sure. But there’s rampant speculation that 9/11 was perpetrated by the Pentaverate. Who the fuck cares about mindless chatter?
The spuriousness of the second claim does not disprove the facts of the first. Follow?
Lost me here:
“evil anti-Auburn Hebrew Joe Schad reported,”
Sorry, that was an attempt to mock conspiracy theory anti-zionist rhetoric.
Yeah, I got that, I will call back the black (no insult intended) helicopters.
And now that I think about it it sounds like something I might hear over an adult beverage at Lou’s in Birmingham.
“The fact that Slive and the SEC convinced the NCAA to treat this as a case of first impression b/c Cam went to a school other than the tainted one is novel but cravenly problematic.”
That’s speculation, not fact. Do you know the difference?
I’m assuming you haven’t read the Clay Travis interview with Mike Slive. It’s the next thread down on this site. It sorta kinda quotes Slive on the whole issue of first impression being determinant and he sorta kinda says this is a loophole that must be corrected.
BTW, what time will my car be ready?
Maybe one day you’ll mature enough to have a discussion without writing stupid shit like “BTW, what time will my car be ready?”
Maybe one day you’ll read quotes from Mike Slive in the Clay Travis article stating that there was a violation and there is a problem with the rule and that this constitutes a loophole without writing stupid shit like “Whether there is a loophole or not is not a fact. What is factual about it? We’re talking about interpretation of rules, not facts. Do you know the difference?…” and “That’s speculation, not fact. Do you know the difference?”
FWIW, can I get that to go?
I have heard tales about how dumb AU folks are all my life, now here comes this guy and Ward Eagle to prove it beyond any doubt. It’s OK to be a sleazeball, lots of people are, but why come here and deny it? Be proud of it AubieCane, everyone knows what you are all about now. The laughingstock of the CFB world. It is hard to be 12-0 and no one wants to be you. It ain’t over, the NCAA will end as a ruling organization if this is allowed to stand as is. Somewhere in Southern California Junior is giving thanks. Camgate makes USC look clean, how could an appeal fail now?
The only people who look stupid are the one’s who insist that Auburn be punished for a crime they assume occurred, but have no evidence for, and then try to manufacture a “loophole” argument to justify their stance. There is no loophole or injustice here. This outcome is only bad if you just really wanted to see Auburn get burned.
If Auburn didn’t pay for Cam, there should be no consequences for playing Cam regardless of what the rules say… but in this case the rules seem to agree. I’m trying to figure out why anyone would want there to be a punishment if their was no payment? There is no injustice or unfair advantage if there was no payment.
There is also no loop-hole. NCAA only cares about extra-benefits when they are actually received or guaranteed at a future date (this is what “agrees to receive” means). They really don’t want to get in the business of punishing every kid/school for every extra-benefit discussion. That would be a very deep hole out of which no SEC school would escape.
It isn’t AU per se that is guilty, it is Cammie. He should be declared ineligible for an obvious violation of the rules. Auburn’s guilt is to play him after they, and everyone else, saw he was guilty. AU was warned about that, and they should be held accountable for that poor judgement. That point in time may have been immediately prior to the UTC game, or perhaps earlier. I don’t know what level punishment that should bring to Auburn the program, but it isn’t likely the death penalty. All games Cam played in should be vacated. Period.
The only people who look stupid are the people that insist Cam shouldn’t be punished b/c his family member shopped him in clear violation of an NCAA rule that states any such act makes the player ineligible.
When the NCAA and Mike Slive agree he violated the rule, only stupid people take to the airwaves, webwaves and bathroom wall at the Citgo in Flea Hop to proclaim the innocence of a player that was declared ineligible.
It is now proven fact he broke the rules. He should be punished. He is a person. Auburn is not the subject of the violation. He is. He received no real punishment.
There is a loophole. That is why Mike Slive said it must be closed in the Clay Travis article.
If South Carolina wins Saturday, they go to the Sugar Bowl. If that sends Auburn to the Capital One Bowl, do you think Capital One will make a commercial with Cecil and Cam asking “what’s in your wallet?”
Actually, though, if Auburn loses, they’ll still wind up in a BCS game.
So the dangerous precedent apparent here is that family members can sound out schools for cash and thus leave players enough “plausible deniability” to escape sanctions from the NCAA.
Yea, sure Cam did not know anything about his dad, the reverend , seeking to pimp him to the highest bidder. Sure.
Senator this may be the weirdest thing I have ever seen in a long life of being an avid (read irrational) sports fan.
Even if you remove the AJ case, where the offender, that would be AJ, did admit receiving an extra, and therefore illegal, benefit, the speed of the ruling (s) is amazing.
It appears the “no comments” from Awbun were exactly what we thought they were, and an indication an investigation was underway (and that this is why Newton was not available to the media.)
And, that the investigation, in the NCAA sense, is still going on, but that until proof is found that Cam Newton was a party to something wrong, it is ok for him to play.
And yet, Newton was ruled ineligible (yes, for just a day, but still).
I gather Newton was ruled ineligible because of the deal at Missy State.
But that was ok because there is no proof to the contrary, and now he is re-instated from his suspension.
I have also noticed that this two-day deal came only after the Iron Bowl, and before the SEC Championship.
And if Newton was ineligible for Tuesday, then why was he not ineligible for last Friday?
One would assume there was an effort to get something no matter how goofy it would appear, resolved before the SEC Championship game and the BCS championship to hopefully keep the Worldwide Order of Weasels (WOW) from babbling about Newton for a the SEC Championship and in the month leading up to the BCS game.
Senator do you think the folks at the NCAA and the SEC actually believe this ruling will stop the WOW from blathering?
Good God, Senator, the boneheads have given the WOW and its minions a whole new blathering playbook…not only is Newton’s ultimate eligibility still in play, it apppears from the ruling, and as you and several others have pointed out, there is a new loophole in the rule book which could have huge consequences for the sport.
I said yesterday I am glad I’ll get to see Newton for a couple of more games, and I am, but, and this is a huge but, a but the size of Kansas, Toto,
pardon the language, but this shit is just fucking weird.
Help me daddy!!!!!!
1. Cam Newton steals a laptop and gets away with it because “he didn’t know that it was stolen”
2. Cam Newton solicits his services for money and gets away without because “he didn’t know that his Dad was doing it”
Seriously, is that all it takes?? Does the NCAA seriously believe that Cecil Newton’s checkbook is going to show a $180,000 deposit?
Anyone willing to pay a 19 year old 3rd string QB $180K is smart enough to hide the money so that no one will ever find it. But one thing’s certain, Cecil Newton isn’t smart enough to never spend it. If he received the money, it’ll pop up one day….
Also, assume you’re the head coach at Auburn and you discover that Cam Newton solicited his services one week earlier. Do you continue to recruit the bombshell? Or, do you run the opposite direction?
And if you don’t run the opposite direction, what does that say about your program? Even if Auburn didn’t participate in the scheme, it takes some serious balls to receive this guy’s commitment one week after his father tried to pimp him out to a neighboring school.
If the NCAA has ever watched a TV crime show, they’ll discover that evidence isn’t always a bloody glove that won’t fit…Sometimes, you actually have to dig a little.
If I were a reporter at SEC, the first thing I’d do is ask Cam for a description of the “person” Cam bought the laptop from. I’d continue to do this at every opportunity to flesh out Cam’s story of “the biggest mistake of my life”. What a bunch of garbage. If it wasn’t stolen, why would you paint a fucking laptop and then throw it out your dorm window when cops come?
Folks, when this stuff first began to surface, there were several reports that Newton admitted he knew the laptop was stolen, and worth more than he paid for it.
He copped to it, admitted it, yada yada yada.
Note to Jason, check yer facts dude.
That’s the rub, why would he not tell the Peace Officer where it was purchased? Why throw it out the window.
In Georgia, if he’s the bonafide purchaser of a stolen good but has no knowledge of the stolen nature of the good, he’s committed no crime. Obviously this might differ in FL, but I doubt it.
We’ve all watched Cops enough times to know that a bullshit story from a perp is just that: a bullshit story.
My buddy lived in Creswell way back when and a dorm monitor smelled “marijuana cigarettes” emanating from his room. When the cops came he threw it out the window and the cops had no cause to arrest him. Doesn’t mean he wasn’t breaking the law. Just means he averted arrest.
“Seriously, is that all it takes?? Does the NCAA seriously believe that Cecil Newton’s checkbook is going to show a $180,000 deposit?”
The problem here is…..it really is difficult to “hide” that much money. I mean, you can stuff it in your mattress and sleep on it for awhile and use it to buy food and such. But if you didn’t have money to begin with and suddenly have money to fix, say a church or hire folks for your business, then you better damn well be ready to point to where you got it. Thats the issues here and why its important that the Feeb’s are involved. The power of the “supoena” is huge here and will….WILL…find out if money moved from one place to Cecil Newton.
Few things are more pathetic than the fans of teams and/or players about to get in big, big trouble. With the other 99.99% of the things that go on in their lives, they’re happy to let common sense do it’s job. Dark clouds probably mean rain, smoke probably means fire, etc., etc., etc. But when the discussion turns to the apparent guilt of Cam Newton (or Reggie Bush, etc.), the whole world’s out to get them, sometimes there can be smoke without a fire, maybe the clouds aren’t really dark … there’s just something wrong with our eyes, etc.
I know Auburn fans who laughed and laughed at how delusional Southern Cal fans sounded in their defenses of Reggie Bush and the USC football program. And now here they are …
The SEC needs another commissioner and the SEC office needs to move to Atlanta where they play the SEC championship game.
My biggest question with this is “If Cam places his decision of where to go to college in his Dad’s hands and his Dad auctions his sons services to the highest bidder. Even if no money changes hands. Does that not at the least make his Dad an agent?” Cecil asked, what the NCAA would classify as an Agent (See A.J. Green), to float prices around.
Seems to me something stinks here. I’m wondering if they are waiting to see what the Feeb’s find before they continue this.
Subscribe in a reader