Auburn/Cam Newton situation (merged)

#952
#952
LSU-SIU said:
Never is a long time. I will take that free bet. The last time I took a free bet I won on this forum. I will try and dig up the thread.

Never say never.

I actually agree with you in part. Auburn will be ok long-term, they continue this circus through the SECC and BCSC and the Heisman, my guess they will get a super hammer.
Click to expand...

Indeed it is. But the NCAA will, in all likelihood, never use the death penalty on a FBS, revenue producing sport.
 
#953
#953
nickknx865 said:
There is no way, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, that the death penalty will be handed out in FBS football again.

It'll be similar to the Alabama situation, IMO.
Click to expand...
Agree that they won't get the death penalty, but it will probably be worse than Albert Means.
 
#954
#954
Jackson_popcorn.gif
 
#955
#955
Something is definitely rotten on the plains.

I would be very surprised if somebody's head doesn't roll when this is all said and done. Be it coaching staff, administrators, or SEC personnel.
 
#957
#957
rjd970 said:
Something is definitely rotten on the plains.

I would be very surprised if somebody's head doesn't roll when this is all said and done. Be it coaching staff, administrators, or SEC personnel.
Click to expand...

I think Chizik might find himself with a pink slip if Auburn suffers damage from this.
 
#961
#961
Basically appears Auburn fans have realized that they are about to be in a lot of trouble and it will put a damper on their season and Heisman contender.
 
#963
#963
Found this on an Auburn board:

Overview of NCAA Bylaws Governing Athlete Agents

NCAA bylaws

Under NCAA Bylaw 12.3, a student-athlete (any individual who currently participates in or who may be eligible in the future to participate in intercollegiate sport) may not agree verbally or in writing to be represented by an athlete agent in the present or in the future for the purpose of marketing the student-athlete's ability or reputation. If the student-athlete enters into such an agreement, the student-athlete is ineligible for intercollegiate competition.

Also, a student-athlete may not accept transportation or other benefits from an athlete agent. This prohibition applies to the student-athlete and his or her relatives or friends.

The term "agent" includes actual agents, runners (individuals who befriend student-athletes and frequently distribute impermissible benefits) and financial advisors.

It is not a violation of NCAA rules if a student-athlete merely talks to an agent (as long as an agreement for agent representation is not established) or socializes with an agent. For example, a student-athlete could go to dinner with an agent and no NCAA violations would result if the student-athlete provided his own transportation and paid for his meal.

What happens if a violation occurs?

Example: A student-athlete is befriended by a runner for an agent. The student-athlete is unaware of the connection between the runner and agent. The runner gives the student-athlete long-distance calling cards, pays for meals, articles of clothing and a new car stereo. The student-athlete never asks why the runner is providing him with these items.

The student-athlete's educational institution becomes aware of the runner's identity and the provision of benefits to the student-athlete.

The institution must declare the student-athlete ineligible for intercollegiate competition. The institution decides to ask for the reinstatement of the student-athlete's eligibility and sends a request to the NCAA staff.

At a minimum, the student-athlete will be required to repay the value of the impermissible benefits and will be withheld from a certain number of contests, based on case precedent
 
#964
#964
Kevinyaheard said:
Found this on an Auburn board:

Overview of NCAA Bylaws Governing Athlete Agents

NCAA bylaws

Under NCAA Bylaw 12.3, a student-athlete (any individual who currently participates in or who may be eligible in the future to participate in intercollegiate sport) may not agree verbally or in writing to be represented by an athlete agent in the present or in the future for the purpose of marketing the student-athlete's ability or reputation. If the student-athlete enters into such an agreement, the student-athlete is ineligible for intercollegiate competition.

Also, a student-athlete may not accept transportation or other benefits from an athlete agent. This prohibition applies to the student-athlete and his or her relatives or friends.

The term "agent" includes actual agents, runners (individuals who befriend student-athletes and frequently distribute impermissible benefits) and financial advisors.

It is not a violation of NCAA rules if a student-athlete merely talks to an agent (as long as an agreement for agent representation is not established) or socializes with an agent. For example, a student-athlete could go to dinner with an agent and no NCAA violations would result if the student-athlete provided his own transportation and paid for his meal.

What happens if a violation occurs?

Example: A student-athlete is befriended by a runner for an agent. The student-athlete is unaware of the connection between the runner and agent. The runner gives the student-athlete long-distance calling cards, pays for meals, articles of clothing and a new car stereo. The student-athlete never asks why the runner is providing him with these items.

The student-athlete's educational institution becomes aware of the runner's identity and the provision of benefits to the student-athlete.

The institution must declare the student-athlete ineligible for intercollegiate competition. The institution decides to ask for the reinstatement of the student-athlete's eligibility and sends a request to the NCAA staff.

At a minimum, the student-athlete will be required to repay the value of the impermissible benefits and will be withheld from a certain number of contests, based on case precedent
Click to expand...

Don't really see why that is posted because we are talking about more than just the "student" in this case.
 
#965
#965
Kevinyaheard said:
New story out about the whole shabang: Broken promise costly to Newton - Colleges - MiamiHerald.com
Click to expand...

This article sums up where we are at THIS point. You've got two sides. One side is MSU with two coaches, supporters and the university saying it was pay for play. The other is Auburn saying they know nothing of Newton's wanting money.

There are fringe storys about money going to repair a broken-down church, FBI asking question, poor reporting at ESPN, cheating on tests at FL, Vegas pulling the line on the game wit UGA and some money even going to a small trucking company the father owns. Not to mention the impact on the SEC Championship game, the Hiesman Trophy and the BCS Championship.

This has the making of a great Grisham novel. If there is a money trail to the Newton's, it will be a Stephen King read for Auburn.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#966
#966
ColonelVol said:
This article sums up where we are at THIS point. You've got two sides. One side is MSU with two coaches, supporters and the university saying it was pay for play. The other is Auburn saying they know nothing of Newton's wanting money.

There are fringe storys about money going to repair a broken-down church, FBI asking question, poor reporting at ESPN, cheating on tests at FL, Vegas pulling the line on the game wit UGA and some money even going to a small trucking company the father owns. Not to mention the impact on the SEC Championship game, the Hiesman Trophy and the BCS Championship.

This has the making of a great Grisham novel. If there is a money trail to the Newton's, it will be a Stephen King read for Auburn.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Auburn's coaching staff that is trying to bury their head in denial, the fans are just dumb at this point.

I slightly disagree, you have don't have two sides to a story. You have one story. Auburn fans are quite funny at this point. The kid is ineligible and they don't like it, they continue this and LSU won't have to worry about Auburn for like a decade.

I have NOT heard once from Auburn, the coach, Cam or his Father that they didn't get money nor tried to get money. I mean you didn't even get a denial that he cheated. This story is pretty much closed, it's just a matter of time now. What is Auburn going to do, put Cam out on a press conference like they did the other day... it crashed and burned hard.
 
Last edited:
#967
#967
LSU-SIU said:
I have NOT heard once from Auburn, the coach, Cam or his Father that they didn't get money nor tried to get money. I mean you didn't even get a denial that he cheated. This story is pretty much closed, it's just a matter of time now. What is Auburn going to do, put Cam out on a press conference like they did the other day... it crashed and burned hard.
Click to expand...

Auburn has denied it as has the coach. They've repeatedly claimed to have no knowledge and that Cam is 100% eligible to play.

On Cam's comments about the cheating: I don't see anything wrong with what he said. It's pretty clear these incidents took place but it was 2 schools ago. Not really relevant to this story at all unless you want to stretch it to "character" but again if the recruiting stuff is true it's not Cam's character that is in question.
 
#968
#968
ColonelVol said:
This article sums up where we are at THIS point. You've got two sides. One side is MSU with two coaches, supporters and the university saying it was pay for play. The other is Auburn saying they know nothing of Newton's wanting money.

There are fringe storys about money going to repair a broken-down church, FBI asking question, poor reporting at ESPN, cheating on tests at FL, Vegas pulling the line on the game wit UGA and some money even going to a small trucking company the father owns. Not to mention the impact on the SEC Championship game, the Hiesman Trophy and the BCS Championship.

This has the making of a great Grisham novel. If there is a money trail to the Newton's, it will be a Stephen King read for Auburn.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Agree
 
#974
#974
Not that I could trump that announcement, but here's something from Yahoo!.

Rogers, in an interview with ESPN 103.3 in Dallas, was asked if Cecil Newton ever told him how much money it would take to get his son to play for Mississippi State. "Yes he did," Rogers said. Asked how much, he said: "Anywhere between $100,000 and $180,000."

Later in the interview, Rogers said he and Cecil Newton first talked after Cam Newton left Florida following the 2008 season. In the course of their conversations, he said Cecil Newton told him "it's not gonna be free this time."
Click to expand...
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top