Mark Emmert continues to flail around in the wake of the NCAA’s ruling on Camgate. Now we’re told that the NCAA “could” put emergency legislation in place at its January convention to prevent the situation from recurring.
Nevermind that it’s hard to see how Emmert’s group comes to grip with the extenuating circumstances – “There was no evidence that Auburn University had anything to do with that or the student-athlete had anything to do with that, and under the rules that exist today, he could play ball.” – any better than it did to begin with, or that it sounds like they’re going to get bogged down in minutiae – “Who is an agent and who is a third party and how do you define that?” “Is it a registered agent? A financial adviser? A counselor, an uncle, an AAU coach? Who is representing you?” – what’s really telling here is his ultimate justification for the ruling.
… The new NCAA chief said the backlash against the organization’s decision to clear Newton to play would have been worse if he were prevented from competing based on the evidence against him. At the same time, he acknowledged it’s a complex legal and ethical issue.
“I was not surprised by the volume or the vitriolic nature, but had we made a different decision, I do think it would have been worse,” Emmert said.
In other words, he was more concerned about incurring Mike Slive’s wrath than anything else. And that Slive is satisfied with the decision is proof that the NCAA made the right call.
After all, let’s not forget that at this point, the ruling has been questioned by several other BCS conference commissioners and that while Emmert thinks he’s been unfairly subjected to vitriol (nice word, by the way) because his critics lack the knowledge of the facts that he commands – “The reason the backlash didn’t surprise me is that the face of the case seemed straight forward but we had to deal with the reality of the facts that were known.” – this is a crisis that’s largely one of the NCAA’s own making. His organization chose to interpret “the rules that exist today” the way it did and Emmert evidently hasn’t felt it necessary to share the information gathered through the NCAA’s investigation with any commissioner besides Slive.
Yeah, this is gonna work out swell next month.
Get The Picture 
Seems to me that since the penalties are often a matter of interpretation they could have just suspended him two games like they did Dareus.
LikeLike
I just can’t get over the fact these guys moved so quickly to determine without a shadow of a doubt that Cammy Cam was innocent. That is the thing that really made my head spin. It took them how many years to investigate Reggie Bush?
Want to know what a great guy Cammy Cam is? Pillar I tell you. Just take a read about the actual laptop situation from the victim…
Gainesville Sun Article
LikeLike
Dang preacher’s kids …
I love this last quote in the article:
“It would have been nice if he would have been playing for the Gators,” (Loschak) said.
LikeLike
Whoa there,Trigger.I’m a preacher’s kid and I never did anything like this. But if my dad had found a hell raising,beer drinking team,I’m sure he would have made some money off my ass.
LikeLike
Whoa. Couple of questions.
1. Why haven’t there been more jokes about Cammy Cam downloading music illegally?
2. How is it that all the football players in Gainesville have the team lawyer on speed dial?
LikeLike
Just where do they get those attorneys from anyway?
LikeLike
OK….I followed the link to the Sun story.
This is a significantly different scenario than the one Newton has painted several times when questioned about the laptop.
Far be it from me to spread vitriol on the HypeMan, but am I the only one Newton causes to itch?
If we catch him lying….or at least re-rendering facts about this can we assume he may be re-rendering about other things?
I am NOT wishing he played at Georgia, we have at least three very competent tight ends.
LikeLike
+1
LikeLike
Um, who writes their name on their laptop unless they’re trying to hide the fact that it ain’t their laptop?
LikeLike
They need new legislation, but he was innocent? Right….
LikeLike
I have two questions, though I’m not sure there are any answers to them (yet, at least).
First, am I crazy, or did the NCAA simply invent this exception about Cam not knowing about his father’s behavior? I’m pretty sure I’ve read all of the relevant by-laws, and I don’t remember seeing a damned thing about whether or not the student-athlete was aware of the solicitation of money. Nor, by the way, do I remember seeing anything that indicated that money actually had to be exchanged in order for it to count as a violation. The language seemed pretty clear to me, and it pretty clearly meant that the case of Cam Newton constituted a violation of NCAA by-laws. This all has the feel of Herbstreit’s (in)famous “You have to be conference champion in order to play for the national championship” rule. It’s just a desperate, phony rule, invented solely for the purpose of serving the NCAA’s purposes–namely, to keep one of their top money-makers on the field.
And second, what happened to the FBI? A while ago, this investigation sounded like a joint venture between the FBI and the NCAA. Is that still going on?
LikeLike
TF….sho do seem like the NCAA had rules to cover this, so your question about making up stuff to cover the situation does seem to apply.
I have read the rules till my eyes are crossed and it also appears to me to be covered in two or three places.
We may not know for quite a while, if ever, what the FBI’s involvement had to do with Newton, if anything.
It is my opinion that the FBI was nosing around looking for involvement of people associated with vote buying in Alabama, in other words that was their main focus. I am not 100% convinced the Feds were actually interested in the Newton case, but some of the people they were investigating for other cases could have been involved so they poked around. The FBI moves at its own pace and in its own various directions.
LikeLike
And I would not like the G-Men poking anything I had an association with! I take a pass on that.
LikeLike
No defense of this mess, but the swarmy way they justified their ruling is in there statement of ruling, not their findings. The ruling was based on “…the best interests of the student athelete…” In theory, they meant that with no smoking-gun evidence they could find (or be willing to disclose) if would not be fair to punish po’ little Cammy. The reality, of course, was preserving the championship game (TCU vs. Oregon?? please….).
Just watch the last 30 seconds of “Pony Excess” as they do a montage of major recruiting violations since the SMU debacle and it’s just a sad reminder that CFB is still very dirty and the NCAA is unwilling to do anything about it. It’s not if you cheat…just do it the right way.
LikeLike
The Camgate thing and the SMU Pony Excess documentary were a blur print for how to get away with it. 1. Never directly involve a coach or player in the process. 2. Find a relative that has control of the player and make him/her an offer they can’t refuse. 3. Once the player signs pay the 3rd party for the length of the agreement no matter what happens to the player. 4. If the NCAA becomes involved lie, lie, lie and lie some more. 5. Hope you are a public school with a good record and not a private school. The NCAA will never punish a public school as much as a private school.
LikeLike
When and If the outstanding Mr. Cam Newton if found to be in violation of the NCAA regulations – the SEC officers should be held accountable for their actions. They have mishandled this whole sordid mess, have punished other student athletes for lesser offenses while ignoring AU and Newton, and worst of all, can’t even make up a good lie to explain away their actions. It is all money, money, money and the other conference members should hold their feet to the fire – they need to be suspended for a few games – or seasons.
LikeLike