Auburn/Cam Newton situation (merged)

[roberthunter]

A solicitation is an offer and an offer is absolutely an agreement to recieve whatever you're asking for in exchange for whatever you're offering. Bottom line is that if the national championship game an Heisman were not hanging in the balance, this decision would not have been issued.

Look, I think Slive should have construed the rule the same way you do, but if you want to get into offer/acceptance rules and ambiguous contract interpretation, a strong argument can be made that Slive got it right.

This guy said I was high because I admitted that the rule is not clear cut. The simple truth is that it is not.

 

[BeecherVol]

I think this closes the book on what happened between Cecil and MSU. Since it has been decided that Cecil shopped his son to MSU.
I have a question(s) for VN.

Knowing the facts (to date) is it likely that Cecil did not stop with MSU and shopped Cam to AU as well?

 

[tennfever]

Pretty interesting they (NCAA) picks there spots to act more stupid than they are.Daddy was hunting the money and poor Cam knew nothing B.S.

 

[rjd970]

I think this closes the book on what happened between Cecil and MSU. Since it has been decided that Cecil shopped his son to MSU.
I have a question(s) for VN.

Knowing the facts (to date) is it likely that Cecil did not stop with MSU and shopped Cam to AU as well?

It certainly wouldn't be surprising, but that in and of itself isn't enough to act. It doesn't matter what you believe happened, it only matters what you can prove happened. To date, nothing has been proved that has been released to the public.

 

[GreyWolf1129]

I think this closes the book on what happened between Cecil and MSU. Since it has been decided that Cecil shopped his son to MSU.
I have a question(s) for VN.

Knowing the facts (to date) is it likely that Cecil did not stop with MSU and shopped Cam to AU as well?

Yes.

And there is an article out there somewhere...ESPN or Fox...where, when asked by a friend why he enrolled at Auburn, Cam Newton (allegedly) replied "the money was too much".

Cameron, not his dad. And allegedly, not confirmed.

Bearing in mind that I believe there were at least three gunmen in Dealey Plaza, and that Oswald was not one of them, here's what I believe about this saga:

(1) Cam Newton was about to be expelled from UF for academic violations, and his previous criminal act. You don't go from UF to Blinn College because the football, or academics, are better.

(2) The "MSU Incident" is obviously true, and Cam's dad left his fingerprints all over it.

(3) Auburn paid for Cam Newton. One way or another. The school might not know (possible); Chizik might not know (I doubt it); but it's a safe bet that, somehow, someway, a substantial sum of money found it's way from an Auburn booster to Cam's dad. Cash can be hard to track. Ask yourself this question: If he shopped his son to MSU (he did), and he was rebuffed (he was), does he just give up, and let Cam enroll wherever Cam wants to play? Or does he find another school, and another way to cash in on his son's athletic ability?

(4) And you have to ask yourself: If Auburn were not about to play for the SEC Championship, and possibly the BCS NC...if Cam Newton were not the Heisman front-runner...would the NCAA have ruled the way they did? What if this had been the 3rd team RB for New Mexico?

Where there's smoke, there's fire. Cam Newton might not know he's been bought and paid for, but his father certainly does. When the story finally comes out, and it eventually will, all the NCAA will have done here is prove that, much like their stance on a playoff for FBS teams, they are wrong more often than they are right. The Cam Newton story will not be an exception. Cam Newton and Auburn will be the new Reggie Bush and USC.

Go Vols.

 

[BeecherVol]

It certainly wouldn't be surprising, but that in and of itself isn't enough to act. It doesn't matter what you believe happened, it only matters what you can prove happened. To date, nothing has been proved that has been released to the public.

Oh I agree with that part. Im not sure the AA is that deep into it if there is something there to find past MSU.

 

[rjd970]

Devils advocate here....

According to a 'barner I work with, "the money was too much" comment has been explained by Cam as meaning the MSU money was too much and he didn't want to go to MSU because they were offering money.

Just saying...that is probably how that is going to be played out if it turns out to be legit.

 

[BeecherVol]

Devils advocate here....

According to a 'barner I work with, "the money was too much" comment has been explained by Cam as meaning the MSU money was too much and he didn't want to go to MSU because they were offering money.

Just saying...that is probably how that is going to be played out if it turns out to be legit.

Thats possible.

Im not sure if Im a AU fan that I would want those comments to even surface for interpretation.

That is interesting, didn't the AA' claim Cam didn't know it was going on. Wasn't that part of the reason he was cleared?

 

[GreyWolf1129]

Thats possible.

Im not sure if Im a AU fan that I would want those comments to even surface for interpretation.

That is interesting, didn't the AA' claim Cam didn't know it was going on. Wasn't that part of the reason he was cleared?

The whole thing smells. Bad.

And all the NCAA has done is spray Febreeze on it.

 

[BeecherVol]

The whole thing smells. Bad.

And all the NCAA has done is spray Febreeze on it.

Febreeze is like duct tape.

Im not one to call foul without something to hang it on. At least I try not to. But after what has been proven as fact, its hard for me to imagine it stopped with that.

 

[Escape Goat]

The whole thing smells. Bad.

And all the NCAA has done is spray Febreeze on it.

So do you think that Auburn will ultimately pay for this "fiasco" ?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[Pops49]

The "As the Plains Burns" thread at tigerdroppings provides a lengthy but thorough explanation of the entire situation to date and explains why yesterday's decision means absolutely nothing.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[GreyWolf1129]

Febreeze is like duct tape.

Im not one to call foul without something to hang it on. At least I try not to. But after what has been proven as fact, its hard for me to imagine it stopped with that.

Agreed. Think about this: When is the last time that allegations were made about improper dealings by a college / university, booster, or player...and in the end it was determined that the allegations were false?

Not unproven...false.

 

[GreyWolf1129]

So do you think that Auburn will ultimately pay for this "fiasco" ?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Hard to say. The NCAA has a lot of egg on it's face for the Bush / USC investigation. Remember how long it took to get those wheels turning.

For them to clear Newton now, and then come back in a year or two and reverse this decision? Not likely, unless they can claim "new" evidence.

The truth will come out, eventually, yes. Just don't expect it to come from the NCAA.

 

[GreyWolf1129]

The "As the Plains Burns" thread at tigerdroppings provides a lengthy but thorough explanation of the entire situation to date and explains why yesterday's decision means absolutely nothing.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Can you summarize?

 

[BeecherVol]

Can you summarize?

It would take a while.

Some of it was posted over here a while back. Deep stuff, that goes past Newton.

 

[GreyWolf1129]

It would take a while.

Some of it was posted over here a while back. Deep stuff, that goes past Newton.

I'm reading it now, and it's explosive.

 

[GreyWolf1129]

Auburn football is toast.

Enjoy the next few weeks, War Eagles. When this is over, you'll be cheering for your badminton team.

Seriously.

 

[Pops49]

Can you summarize?

Pay-for-play has been occurring, off and on, for at least a couple of decades. Board of Trustee members are at heart of problem. The money launder in the pfp scheme is also involved in Al. vote buying scheme. FBI conducts investigstion, with wire taps, beginning in late 09. FBI stumbles onto pfp scheme in investigation. FBI apparently has taped conversations detailing the pfp scheme. One tape allegedly involves Trooper in a discussion with a booster concerning the pfp scheme. Newton isn't the only player involved. Allegations suggest that a large number of recruits in the last class were paid. Article details how financial, political, and athletic corruption are intertwined in Al. and specifically at Auburn.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[roberthunter]

NCAA president says Cam Newton case different because neither QB, Auburn knew of father's plans | al.com

NCAA president clarifies the ruling.

This should have been released with the original ruling. Auburn is still under investigation. He makes it clear that it would have been a different situation if a family member had received benefits from Miss St. They recognize a loophole exists and will close it.

 

[cmelton7]

I believe that this stuff goes on at every major college sports program. There are a few things that set this incident apart from the usual instance of Tee Martin driving a vehicle that nobody in his family could reasonably afford. What really gets to me is that Cecil Martin essentially took money to save his job. The guy is a "man of God" that exploited his son to stay in business. His church received a miracle donation (or money from somewhere) to get up to code, when it appeared impossible. To say that Cam knew nothing about this, insults anyone with a lick intelligence. Cam Newton is a preacher's son. He is a thief. He is too lazy or stupid to do his own work in the classroom (If you say that this is a non-issue in relation to his Auburn situation, then you are right, but as a part of his character evaluation; it is relevant). He is everything that is wrong with college atheletics (being that it is supposed to comprise itself of students, and not atheletic freaks that cannot read at 10th grade level). His dad represents everything that is wrong with society. He is a hypocrite. He has violated several of the simple Christian values. Before anyone accuses me of being holier than thou, I am no perfect person. However, I am not being paid to be an ambassador of any religion. I am not being paid to endorse anything. If I was selling stocks in oil though, I wouldn't be caught driving a hybrid. I just hope these guys get what they deserve (probably not, hell Terrell Owens will probably be a reality TV star long after he has pissed off every team in the NFL). Go Gamecocks this week. I want the SEC to win every title, but not when they will have to forfeit it later. Go Vols. Sorry for the long post, but I think that the NCAA is really setting a bad standard here.eace2:

 

[VolunteerHillbilly]

Look, I think Slive should have construed the rule the same way you do, but if you want to get into offer/acceptance rules and ambiguous contract interpretation, a strong argument can be made that Slive got it right.

This guy said I was high because I admitted that the rule is not clear cut. The simple truth is that it is not.

Offer + acceptance = contract is Day 1 law school material. The rule was crystal clear before Slive's ruling. Now, apparently, you can have a legal contract without having an agreement under SEC rules. If the rule is ambiguous, it's because of the convoluted interpretation and I don't think that a former judge would put his imprimatur on such an opionion unless he is being an activist.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[cmelton7]

Dream on sucka. Cam is good to go and we're number 1. Gonna beat yalls ass next time we play.

:neener2: :shaking2: :finger3:

I don't know. It depends on how badly the probation affects you guys. Come on. You never thought that Auburn would ever be able to win a title that would be (permanently) recognized did you? Scam Newton will not win a national title.

 

[milohimself]

I think Auburn's gonna win it this year. Cam will humiliate the Ducks defense.

 

[roberthunter]

Offer + acceptance = contract is Day 1 law school material. The rule was crystal clear before Slive's ruling. Now, apparently, you can have a legal contract without having an agreement under SEC rules.

In the case between Miss St and Cecil, there was an offer by Cecil and no acceptance by Miss St. The language of the by-law is ambiguous because it does not prohibit "solicitation" or "offering," but prohibits "agreeing to receive." Taking that section in context, it appears an "agreement" (an offer by the institution and an acceptance by the family member) is required before the by-law is invoked in the manner we are discussing.

If you want to continue this discussion I suggest we do it by pm, as we are getting into some boring legalese here.