FBI, Lowder, Dye Etc Unbelievable Summary on the Newton Situation (Must Read)

Which wire taps? The McGregor/Lowder investigation has been going on for quite some time.

I don't mind looking silly but threads talking about Auburn being kicked out of the SEC look sillier to me.

The speculation is the wire taps in place for the McGregor/Lowder investigation have a record of the Newton deals going on. At least, that is the way I understand it.

Auburn getting kicked out of the SEC does seem silly IMO.
 
149551_633309506029_51802557_35551999_6723823_n.jpg
 
The speculation is the wire taps in place for the McGregor/Lowder investigation have a record of the Newton deals going on. At least, that is the way I understand it.

Auburn getting kicked out of the SEC does seem silly IMO.

That's my point. There has been no source that has made this claim so far as I can tell. It is pure speculation. Maybe it's true.

If it's true then Auburn deserves to be hammered. Until some verification emerges I'm not making statements about what happened.
 
The speculation is the wire taps in place for the McGregor/Lowder investigation have a record of the Newton deals going on. At least, that is the way I understand it.

Auburn getting kicked out of the SEC does seem silly IMO.

That's how I take it too. Which makes sense with the timing of the indictments of those mentioned, and the leaking of this story. Jus sayin. Also, the way I see AU in trouble with the SEC is the repeated issues with SaCs. (Which, I would assume are separately documented. Although ill admit I didn't look it up) But it would seem acutomatic if they were to lose their accredidation.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
That's my point. There has been no source that has made this claim so far as I can tell. It is pure speculation. Maybe it's true.

If it's true then Auburn deserves to be hammered. Until some verification emerges I'm not making statements about what happened.

I agree. Just offering up some clarification, thats all.

:peace2:
 
That's my point. There has been no source that has made this claim so far as I can tell. It is pure speculation. Maybe it's true.

If it's true then Auburn deserves to be hammered. Until some verification emerges I'm not making statements about what happened.

Cecil, is that you?
 
That's how I take it too. Which makes sense with the timing of the indictments of those mentioned, and the leaking of this story. Jus sayin. Also, the way I see AU in trouble with the SEC is the repeated issues with SaCs. (Which, I would assume are separately documented. Although ill admit I didn't look it up) But it would seem acutomatic if they were to lose their accredidation.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

To be honest I don't know if SACS and the SEC have anything to do with each other.

SACS is an academic accrediting board that many schools throughout the South particpate in.

I don't know that the SEC has a SACS requirement for membership and when schools "lose" accreditation is generally a short-term situation.
 
To be honest I don't know if SACS and the SEC have anything to do with each other.

SACS is an academic accrediting board that many schools throughout the South particpate in.

I don't know that the SEC has a SACS requirement for membership and when schools "lose" accreditation is generally a short-term situation.

I would be surprised if there isn't some type of accreditation requirement for every major conference affiliation.

That said, "if" auburn was to be voted out, I doubt that is the reason.
 
I would be surprised if there isn't some type of accreditation requirement for every major conference affiliation.

Likely but they may not all require the same accreditation. For example, Vandy may or may not mess with SACS (unsure).

I really don't know the answer to this but think the SACS thing is a red herring.
 
Likely but they may not all require the same accreditation. For example, Vandy may or may not mess with SACS (unsure).

I really don't know the answer to this but think the SACS thing is a red herring.

Vandy's also accredited by the SACS.
 
It seems that accreditation is almost like iso 9000 (or whatever it is up to now), not so much an accomplishment but a requirement to show basic competency.
 
It seems that accreditation is almost like iso 9000 (or whatever it is up to now), not so much an accomplishment but a requirement to show basic competency.

Losing accreditation is terrible for the university.
Their degrees would be almost worthless. Their students would have a hard time being admitted to other schools grad schools, professional boards would likely refuse to allow their graduates to sit for professional examination, and faculty would begin to abandon the place as fast as they could.
 
I don't know. If you lose your accreditation because your BOT is a bunch of criminals, not because you're academics are awful, I wouldn't think it would be too hard to get it back, and as an employer I wouldn't care anyways. I would think it would be worse from a university research POV than anything else.
 
Losing accreditation is terrible for the university.
Their degrees would be almost worthless. Their students would have a hard time being admitted to other schools grad schools, professional boards would likely refuse to allow their graduates to sit for professional examination, and faculty would begin to abandon the place as fast as they could.

I posted this in another thread originally, but it applies here here too:

I think its automatic that Auburn gets kicked out if they lose SACS accreditation based on SEC charter.

But they aren't going to lose accreditation no matter what happened with the guys on the board. SACS is not going to strip accreditation from a school with that many alumni and that active enrollment at a Public University. Alabama has a govenor, two Senators, a pack of congressmen, a state legislature, and bunch of alumni lawyers and alumni judges that would prevent that.

Accreditation loss is a risk for small schools, not big publics.
 
So if Auburn loses to Bama and this is still as unresolved as it is now, will they sit Cam for the last two games to save some form of face?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
What would happen on the SEC situation if they received the death penalty? Would the 12 member rule affect us on the SECCG? I know nothing has been proven, but as I said before, if half of this is proven true, they will be the next SMU.
 
So if Auburn loses to Bama and this is still as unresolved as it is now, will they sit Cam for the last two games to save some form of face?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Why would they? There would be no upside. If he is ineligible, the damage is already done. Sitting him now isn't going to change any of that.

Auburn has already put all of its chips in the middle of the table. It really is backed into a corner at this point. It has no choice but wait and see the turn of the cards. It is either going to come out smelling completely like a rose or erupt into a huge mushroom cloud. I don't see much middle ground on this.
 

VN Store



Back
Top