Auburn/Cam Newton situation (merged)

[Supravol22]

This whole thing just makes me sick:sick:

 

[KingNick865]

How nice.

Dillion Baxter is ruled ineligible for taking a ride in a golf cart. Cam Newton's father solicited his son's services for a paycheck, and is ruled eligible to play.

Excuse me, but WTF kind of ruling is that.

 

[OtterFH]

Since it is still considered an ongoing investigation...does anybody think that this is just a tactic, by the ncaa, to set fire to the field and draw the rats out? Meaning, maybe the ncaa just did this to piss the right people off, in hopes it brings out the ones that might have the information the ncaa wants.
i.e. boosters, schools themselves, ect.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[vols-1]

The SEC’s by-laws state that no parent or guardian or other agent can solicit money on behalf of a player without the player being ruled ineligible.

NCAA just ruled that his dad solicited money from MSU... I guess this rule just got broken and is pushed aside.

According to this there is no specific bylaw:

"With the official revelation by the NCAA that Cecil Newton did solicit money in exchange for his son’s commitment to enroll at MSU, another question pops up: Does that mean Newton should therefore be ruled ineligible according to SEC bylaws?

Well, no, says the SEC. For background, here’s the SEC bylaw raised into question:

“If at any time before or after matriculation in a member institution a student-athlete or any member of his/her family receives or agrees to receive, directly or indirectly, any aid or assistance beyond or in addition to that permitted by the Bylaws of this Conference (except such aid or assistance as such student-athlete may receive from those persons on whom the student is naturally or legally dependent for support), such student- athlete shall be ineligible for competition in any intercollegiate sport within the Conference for the remainder of his/her college career.”

“SEC Bylaw 14.01.3.2 does not apply in this situation,” SEC spokesman Charles Bloom said in an e-mail to The Clarion-Ledger. “It only applies when there is an actual payment of an improper benefit, or an agreement (such as a handshake agreement) to pay and receive an improper benefit. The facts in this case, as we understand them, are that the
student-athlete’s father, without the knowledge of the student-athlete, solicited improper payments (which were rejected) from an institution the young man did not attend, and that the institution where the young man is enrolled was not involved.”

 

[primetime865]

Dooley needs to start paying parents then.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[DaddyChad]

According to this there is no specific bylaw:

"With the official revelation by the NCAA that Cecil Newton did solicit money in exchange for his son’s commitment to enroll at MSU, another question pops up: Does that mean Newton should therefore be ruled ineligible according to SEC bylaws?

Well, no, says the SEC. For background, here’s the SEC bylaw raised into question:

“If at any time before or after matriculation in a member institution a student-athlete or any member of his/her family receives or agrees to receive, directly or indirectly, any aid or assistance beyond or in addition to that permitted by the Bylaws of this Conference (except such aid or assistance as such student-athlete may receive from those persons on whom the student is naturally or legally dependent for support), such student- athlete shall be ineligible for competition in any intercollegiate sport within the Conference for the remainder of his/her college career.”

“SEC Bylaw 14.01.3.2 does not apply in this situation,” SEC spokesman Charles Bloom said in an e-mail to The Clarion-Ledger. “It only applies when there is an actual payment of an improper benefit, or an agreement (such as a handshake agreement) to pay and receive an improper benefit. The facts in this case, as we understand them, are that the
student-athlete’s father, without the knowledge of the student-athlete, solicited improper payments (which were rejected) from an institution the young man did not attend, and that the institution where the young man is enrolled was not involved.”

BS, IMHO. If this were any other player they would be ruled ineligible.

 

[vols-1]

But if you suspend Cam because he didn't know this agent(Bill Bell) was asking for money then you open pandora's box. The next thing you know a Bama booster sends someone up to TN and ask for money on Brays behalf. Under that rule Bray gets suspened because someone ask for money for him even though he did not know about it. How much sense does it make to suspend a player because a third party ask for money on their behalf if you can't prove the player knew anything about it?

 

[OrangeAndWhite!]

If everyone was as curious as I was as to why Auburn ruled Cam ineligible, here is why. Im sick of hearing thoughts and opinions, so I did some leg for for us all. Of course everything within a regulation is subject to interpretation. Attached is straight out of the NCAA rule book. I am still astonished that the NCAA came back by the deadline with the ruling they did. This is going to be long, but i summarized this out of 431 pages....and your going to see it first hand

31.2.1 Institutional Eligibility. To be eligible to enter teams or individual student-athletes in NCAA championships, an institution shall recognize the sport involved as a varsity intercollegiate sport (see Bylaw 17.02.12) and shall meet the institutional requirements set forth in Bylaw 18.4.2 applicable to the division in which the institution is a member or for which it is petitioning for eligibility in a sport. An institution that holds membership in a member conference may not enter teams or individuals in an NCAA championship unless they are eligible for such competition under the rules of that conference [see Bylaw 18.4.2.1-(a)].

31.2.1.2 Deadline. The institutional eligibility requirements for entry into NCAA championships (see Bylaw18.4.2) must be met by the following dates [in addition to the deadline for the academic reporting form required for Division I set forth in Bylaw 18.4.2.2-(c)]:
(a) September 15 for fall championships;
(b) December 1 for winter championships; and
(c) March 1 for spring championships.

.......I thought this was interesting considering that Auburn requested for an immediate ruling after dubbing him ineligible; the NCAA managed to get it back to them by December 1st....fast work, huh? and then follow it up with this rule...

31.2.1.7.1.1 Failure to Report Ineligible Student-Athlete Prior to Selection. If an institution fails to report an ineligible student-athlete prior to being selected to participate in the championship,the governing sports committee may declare the institution ineligible to participate in the tournament for one or two years.

.....so no wonder Auburn ruled him ineligible; however they waited until the very last minute...after the regular season.....

31.2.1.7.1.2 Discovery of Ineligibility of Student-Athlete After Selection. If an institution fails to report an ineligible student-athlete and the omission is not discovered until after the institution is selected to participate in the championship, necessitating the institution’s withdrawal from the championship, that withdrawal shall be considered as one of the years of ineligibility, provided another institution participates in the championship in place of the disqualified institution. If the discovery of the ineligible student-athlete occurs so near the beginning of the championship that the governing sports committee does not have a reasonable period of time to replace the disqualified institution in the
bracket, that fact shall be taken into consideration in determining the number of years the disqualified institution shall be ineligible to participate.


some additional tidbits:

12.1.2 Amateur Status. An individual loses amateur status and thus shall not be eligible for intercollegiate
competition in a particular sport if the individual:
(a) Uses his or her athletics skill (directly or indirectly) for pay in any form in that sport;

............this was done indirectly through his father, with a statement made by Cam saying the pay was to good at Auburn.......

12.1.2.1 Prohibited Forms of Pay. “Pay,” as used in Bylaw 12.1.2 above, includes, but is not limited to, the
following:
12.1.2.1.4.6 Expenses for Parents/Legal Guardians of Participants in Athletics Competition. Expenses received by the parents or legal guardians of a participant in athletics competition from a nonprofessional organization sponsoring the competition in excess of actual and necessary travel, room and board expenses, or any entertainment expenses, unless such expenses are made available to the parents or legal guardians of all participants in the competition. (Adopted: 1/16/93, Revised: 1/11/97)

ill stop here, this is too long and nobody is probably even going to read to this point.....hope you got something out of this

 

[vols-1]

BS, IMHO. If this were any other player they would be ruled ineligible.

Dr. David Ridpath (former NCAA compliance officer) was on the radio today and he cited some other case where a similar situation happened and the player went to another university and still played like Cam did. Dr. Ridpath basically said the same thing as above that there is no specific bylaw.

 

[GoBigOrange_2309]

nice work i'm sure but i didn't read all of it. bottom line is if auburn was out of the title hunt and he wasn't a lock for the heisman he would be ineligible

 

[TnScooby]

Just a rumor, The NCAA is so PISSED OFF at Auburn, they are gonna put UAB on 2 years probation:blink:

 

[tvols75]

If everyone was as curious as I was as to why Auburn ruled Cam ineligible, here is why. Im sick of hearing thoughts and opinions, so I did some leg for for us all. Of course everything within a regulation is subject to interpretation. Attached is straight out of the NCAA rule book. I am still astonished that the NCAA came back by the deadline with the ruling they did. This is going to be long, but i summarized this out of 431 pages....and your going to see it first hand

31.2.1 Institutional Eligibility. To be eligible to enter teams or individual student-athletes in NCAA championships, an institution shall recognize the sport involved as a varsity intercollegiate sport (see Bylaw 17.02.12) and shall meet the institutional requirements set forth in Bylaw 18.4.2 applicable to the division in which the institution is a member or for which it is petitioning for eligibility in a sport. An institution that holds membership in a member conference may not enter teams or individuals in an NCAA championship unless they are eligible for such competition under the rules of that conference [see Bylaw 18.4.2.1-(a)].

31.2.1.2 Deadline. The institutional eligibility requirements for entry into NCAA championships (see Bylaw18.4.2) must be met by the following dates [in addition to the deadline for the academic reporting form required for Division I set forth in Bylaw 18.4.2.2-(c)]:
(a) September 15 for fall championships;
(b) December 1 for winter championships; and
(c) March 1 for spring championships.

.......I thought this was interesting considering that Auburn requested for an immediate ruling after dubbing him ineligible; the NCAA managed to get it back to them by December 1st....fast work, huh? and then follow it up with this rule...

31.2.1.7.1.1 Failure to Report Ineligible Student-Athlete Prior to Selection. If an institution fails to report an ineligible student-athlete prior to being selected to participate in the championship,the governing sports committee may declare the institution ineligible to participate in the tournament for one or two years.

.....so no wonder Auburn ruled him ineligible; however they waited until the very last minute...after the regular season.....

31.2.1.7.1.2 Discovery of Ineligibility of Student-Athlete After Selection. If an institution fails to report an ineligible student-athlete and the omission is not discovered until after the institution is selected to participate in the championship, necessitating the institution’s withdrawal from the championship, that withdrawal shall be considered as one of the years of ineligibility, provided another institution participates in the championship in place of the disqualified institution. If the discovery of the ineligible student-athlete occurs so near the beginning of the championship that the governing sports committee does not have a reasonable period of time to replace the disqualified institution in the
bracket, that fact shall be taken into consideration in determining the number of years the disqualified institution shall be ineligible to participate.


some additional tidbits:

12.1.2 Amateur Status. An individual loses amateur status and thus shall not be eligible for intercollegiate
competition in a particular sport if the individual:
(a) Uses his or her athletics skill (directly or indirectly) for pay in any form in that sport;

............this was done indirectly through his father, with a statement made by Cam saying the pay was to good at Auburn.......

12.1.2.1 Prohibited Forms of Pay. “Pay,” as used in Bylaw 12.1.2 above, includes, but is not limited to, the
following:
12.1.2.1.4.6 Expenses for Parents/Legal Guardians of Participants in Athletics Competition. Expenses received by the parents or legal guardians of a participant in athletics competition from a nonprofessional organization sponsoring the competition in excess of actual and necessary travel, room and board expenses, or any entertainment expenses, unless such expenses are made available to the parents or legal guardians of all participants in the competition. (Adopted: 1/16/93, Revised: 1/11/97)

ill stop here, this is too long and nobody is probably even going to read to this point.....hope you got something out of this

tl;dr

 

[cmelton7]

This Cam Newton decision is really bothering me. The guy is a thief (laptop at Florida), a liar, and a cheater (busted at least three times for academic fraud). His dad is worse. He exploited his twenty year old son. He lied about it. He is supposed to be a man of God. Who would attend a sermon given by a nationally known liar. I know that it is not what you know, but what you can prove; however, it is an absolute joke that the NCAA can say that Cam had no knowledge that his dad took payment for his letter of intent. One day the guy is losing his church, the next day it is brought up to code. Cam had no idea. Right. I came from a family that didn't have a lot of money, but if my dad received a couple hundred thousand it would have caught my attention. This is a disgrace. The SEC is going out of their way to suspend Bruce Pearl. Auburn is going to make the league a lot of money, so the league acts ignorant. Bruce Pearl should have forked out a couple hundred thousand to Sellby's mom, and it would have been the same. The precedent that the NCAA is setting with this decision is only going to make it impossible to stop this sort of thing from happening in the future. Cecil Newton is a lying thief, and should not be allowed to preach anywhere. WWJD Cecil? Exploit his son for money? Get a real job. I would think twice before putting money in that collection plate. What a piece of trash. Cam and Cecil are both dishonest trash, and the NCAA just agreed to condone their behavior. It is a sad day for sports and humanity.:crazy:

 

[Vols4ever]

Name changed from Scam Newton to Cam "Knew"ton..... He definitely knew his dad was getting tons of money!!!!

 

[Sloppydog14]

After they ruled it was ok, gonna be interesting to see the future problems that it causes seeing is how its ok to ask for money.

 

[FREE EARL]

I can't helpt but laugh at USC in all of this. They're holding out hope that this will help them with their appeal, but it wont, and I can't wait until they're further disappointed and their worlds are crushed; Again. As they say, Rome wasn't built in a day, but it burned down in a night.

As for Cam and Auburn? I don't know what to say, because in all honesty, I have no idea what happened or what's going on. Nothing would surprise me at this point.

 

[BuckheadVol1]

Well said, out of breath!?!?

 

[Cooleyvol]

Here's my problem -- the NCAA rule on this (I hear) is that if anyone asks for money in your recruiting process, whether you know about it or not, you are ineligible.


What gives?

 

[imbubbaspitcup]

This Cam Newton decision is really bothering me. The guy is a thief (laptop at Florida), a liar, and a cheater (busted at least three times for academic fraud). His dad is worse. He exploited his twenty year old son. He lied about it. He is supposed to be a man of God. Who would attend a sermon given by a nationally known liar. I know that it is not what you know, but what you can prove; however, it is an absolute joke that the NCAA can say that Cam had no knowledge that his dad took payment for his letter of intent. One day the guy is losing his church, the next day it is brought up to code. Cam had no idea. Right. I came from a family that didn't have a lot of money, but if my dad received a couple hundred thousand it would have caught my attention. This is a disgrace. The SEC is going out of their way to suspend Bruce Pearl. Auburn is going to make the league a lot of money, so the league acts ignorant. Bruce Pearl should have forked out a couple hundred thousand to Sellby's mom, and it would have been the same. The precedent that the NCAA is setting with this decision is only going to make it impossible to stop this sort of thing from happening in the future. Cecil Newton is a lying thief, and should not be allowed to preach anywhere. WWJD Cecil? Exploit his son for money? Get a real job. I would think twice before putting money in that collection plate. What a piece of trash. Cam and Cecil are both dishonest trash, and the NCAA just agreed to condone their behavior. It is a sad day for sports and humanity.:crazy:

Didn't the whole world forgive Jimmy Swaggart and all of those Catholic priest with those little boys.If this happened it's not right,but I bet you 80% of vols fans would do the same thing as Mr.Newton, or would not complain one bit if we were in the same situation as Auburn playing for a possible national title!

 

[Pulscifer]

nice work i'm sure but i didn't read all of it. bottom line is if auburn was out of the title hunt and he wasn't a lock for the heisman he would be ineligible

Yep, book it.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[VolMaster14]

It's all about Auburn and the national title and Cam and the Heisman. If Auburn was 6-6 or 7-5 he would be gone! I'm sure Slive was doin some begging to the AA' too! Nuttin worse than someone in a religious/spiritual position and be a lying, hypocritical piece of crap!! Too bad Reggie Bushes dad wasn't a preacher!!

 

[pantone151]

I'm sure this has been posted, and discussed, in other threads, but I find it interesting that this doesn't seem to matter in this case.

SEC bylaw 14.01.3.2

If at any time before or after matriculation in a member institution a student-athlete or any member of his/her family receives or agrees to receive, directly or indirectly, any aid or assistance beyond or in addition to that permitted by the Bylaws of this Conference (except such aid or assistance as such student-athlete may receive from those persons on whom the student is naturally or legally dependent for support), such student- athlete shall be ineligible for competition in any intercollegiate sport within the Conference for the remainder of his/her college career.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[OrangeNehi]

If Cam Newton knew nothing about his father's deal with Auburn money, why did he end up going to Auburn? Was it just a coincidence? Meanwhile, the NCAA is cracking down on barbecues.

 

[CountVolcula]

But if you suspend Cam because he didn't know this agent(Bill Bell) was asking for money then you open pandora's box. The next thing you know a Bama booster sends someone up to TN and ask for money on Brays behalf. Under that rule Bray gets suspened because someone ask for money for him even though he did not know about it. How much sense does it make to suspend a player because a third party ask for money on their behalf if you can't prove the player knew anything about it?

Has to be a parent or guardian for it to have an impact on the player. It just cant be some random person

 

[roberthunter]

According to this there is no specific bylaw:

"With the official revelation by the NCAA that Cecil Newton did solicit money in exchange for his son’s commitment to enroll at MSU, another question pops up: Does that mean Newton should therefore be ruled ineligible according to SEC bylaws?

Well, no, says the SEC. For background, here’s the SEC bylaw raised into question:

“If at any time before or after matriculation in a member institution a student-athlete or any member of his/her family receives or agrees to receive, directly or indirectly, any aid or assistance beyond or in addition to that permitted by the Bylaws of this Conference (except such aid or assistance as such student-athlete may receive from those persons on whom the student is naturally or legally dependent for support), such student- athlete shall be ineligible for competition in any intercollegiate sport within the Conference for the remainder of his/her college career.”

“SEC Bylaw 14.01.3.2 does not apply in this situation,” SEC spokesman Charles Bloom said in an e-mail to The Clarion-Ledger. “It only applies when there is an actual payment of an improper benefit, or an agreement (such as a handshake agreement) to pay and receive an improper benefit. The facts in this case, as we understand them, are that the
student-athlete’s father, without the knowledge of the student-athlete, solicited improper payments (which were rejected) from an institution the young man did not attend, and that the institution where the young man is enrolled was not involved.”

Pretty much exactly what I said they'd say.