Cam Newton, Auburn, let out a deep sigh of relief but also pay attention. It is the Auburn family against the world. You don’t believe me? Turn on the TV, scan the internet, listen to the radio. You will see and hear an overwhelming majority of the country with an apparent agenda to bring down Auburn University and Cam Newton with regards to the Cam Newton saga. I am never one to believe in conspiracies, black helicopters, or the us vs them attitude; however, the Cam Newton saga has opened my eyes and I can say that I have lost a LOT of respect for a lot of media personalities. I have no problem with someone voicing an opinion and I believe that opinions should be voiced, however the words, actions, and outright lies and venom I have seen the past month has never been rivaled in the history of sports.
The NCAA ruled on the Cam Newton saga this week. On Monday Cam was ruled ineligible for breaking NCAA rules. AU petitioned for his reinstatement and on Wednesday this request was granted. The NCAA stated Cam was eligible moving forward and had not played in any games while being ineligible (indicating that Auburn will retain their first 12 wins). Instead of considering the case closed I have actually seen the whole saga reach a whole new level.
I for one believe the NCAA got this one right. Was this an easy decision? NO. Should Cecil Newton be punished? ABSOLUTELY, I agree with Mike Slive that his actions should not be tolerated in The SEC or anywhere in college athletics. Has Cecil been punished? Yes, he has been punished with “limited access” to Auburn, the football team, and most importantly the starting QB, his son.
Let me highlight some discussions and arguments I have heard and why I believe they are absolutely wrong.
1. Auburn broke the rules and got away with it. Wrong, Auburn never was accused of breaking any rules. No money exchanged hands between AU and any recruit and no discussions regarding money and Cam Newton ever took place with AU officials or boosters. The only rule AU could have possibly broken therefore was playing and ineligible player and per the NCAA ruling the player in question has never been ineligible. Therefore no rules were broken.
2. Cam and Cecil Newton broke the rules by soliciting for money and are not being punished. Wrong. First, no one has said Cecil solicited for money, only that he was involved in discussions with an “agent” and money was discussed at said meetings. Secondly, Cam and Cecil were found guilty. He was declared ineligible and Cecil was punished based on money conversations. All this makes it seem as though Cam was not punished for a couple of reason. First, no one released info regarding the initial ruling and the decision to make Cam ineligible. Secondly, Cam was reinstated quickly. When you look at the NCAA process they first rule on the eligibility based on if a rule was broken and then they look at punishment and reinstatement of the player. The punishment and reinstatement, per the NCAA, takes into account multiple factors not just the rule. The factors that worked in Cam’s favor are:
a. Cam did not know about the discussions. Many don’t believe this is true and have used this argument to describe how the decision is wrong, however it really doesn’t matter as this was the least important factor.
b. No money exchanged hands. Read that again and let it sink in. Does that seem like a minor detail in all this?
c. ALL discussions regarding Cam and money took place with Mississippi Sate and MSU boosters. Cam plays for Auburn. No discussions took place at Auburn.
3. This decision has opened a HUGE loophole within the rules and allows any parent to shop their kids to various schools as long as the kid doesn’t know. Wrong and just plain stupid. I have heard this argument all week. Here is why this is wrong. As soon as said parent, player, aunt, uncle, agent, dog, anyone accepted money for said players signature then the player is ineligible. So ask for money all you want but as soon as you accept it you are done. What is the benefit of running around asking for money and not accepting it? Am I missing something?
a. The other point here is the opposite side of this argument. If said discussions deemed players ineligible and put schools on probation then what would stop opposing teams from just claiming that during their recruitment of said players, parents asked about money? Example – I could easily call the SEC, NCAA, Pac-10, ESPN, Fox, etc and say that I offered LaMichael James money. Now he is ineligible. That should make the national championship game a little easier!
4. The timing of this decision shows favoritism to Auburn because of championships and the Heisman. Wrong. This matter has been under investigation since July and quite possibly since January. It is possible that the NCAA released the ruling with thoughts about the SEC game and the Heisman. However, I would also throw this out there. Auburn, the SEC, the NCAA, and many others did not want this information public (it is an ongoing investigation). The information was leaked by someone and I have a hard time believing it was the SEC, Auburn, or the NCAA (did anyone hear anything about the ruling Monday?). Therefore the need for this decision was brought about by the “Wizards behind the curtains” who released this info and created mass chaos.
Overall this is a great thing for Auburn and Cam Newton. War Eagle and see you in Glendale!
The NCAA ruled on the Cam Newton saga this week. On Monday Cam was ruled ineligible for breaking NCAA rules. AU petitioned for his reinstatement and on Wednesday this request was granted. The NCAA stated Cam was eligible moving forward and had not played in any games while being ineligible (indicating that Auburn will retain their first 12 wins). Instead of considering the case closed I have actually seen the whole saga reach a whole new level.
I for one believe the NCAA got this one right. Was this an easy decision? NO. Should Cecil Newton be punished? ABSOLUTELY, I agree with Mike Slive that his actions should not be tolerated in The SEC or anywhere in college athletics. Has Cecil been punished? Yes, he has been punished with “limited access” to Auburn, the football team, and most importantly the starting QB, his son.
Let me highlight some discussions and arguments I have heard and why I believe they are absolutely wrong.
1. Auburn broke the rules and got away with it. Wrong, Auburn never was accused of breaking any rules. No money exchanged hands between AU and any recruit and no discussions regarding money and Cam Newton ever took place with AU officials or boosters. The only rule AU could have possibly broken therefore was playing and ineligible player and per the NCAA ruling the player in question has never been ineligible. Therefore no rules were broken.
2. Cam and Cecil Newton broke the rules by soliciting for money and are not being punished. Wrong. First, no one has said Cecil solicited for money, only that he was involved in discussions with an “agent” and money was discussed at said meetings. Secondly, Cam and Cecil were found guilty. He was declared ineligible and Cecil was punished based on money conversations. All this makes it seem as though Cam was not punished for a couple of reason. First, no one released info regarding the initial ruling and the decision to make Cam ineligible. Secondly, Cam was reinstated quickly. When you look at the NCAA process they first rule on the eligibility based on if a rule was broken and then they look at punishment and reinstatement of the player. The punishment and reinstatement, per the NCAA, takes into account multiple factors not just the rule. The factors that worked in Cam’s favor are:
a. Cam did not know about the discussions. Many don’t believe this is true and have used this argument to describe how the decision is wrong, however it really doesn’t matter as this was the least important factor.
b. No money exchanged hands. Read that again and let it sink in. Does that seem like a minor detail in all this?
c. ALL discussions regarding Cam and money took place with Mississippi Sate and MSU boosters. Cam plays for Auburn. No discussions took place at Auburn.
3. This decision has opened a HUGE loophole within the rules and allows any parent to shop their kids to various schools as long as the kid doesn’t know. Wrong and just plain stupid. I have heard this argument all week. Here is why this is wrong. As soon as said parent, player, aunt, uncle, agent, dog, anyone accepted money for said players signature then the player is ineligible. So ask for money all you want but as soon as you accept it you are done. What is the benefit of running around asking for money and not accepting it? Am I missing something?
a. The other point here is the opposite side of this argument. If said discussions deemed players ineligible and put schools on probation then what would stop opposing teams from just claiming that during their recruitment of said players, parents asked about money? Example – I could easily call the SEC, NCAA, Pac-10, ESPN, Fox, etc and say that I offered LaMichael James money. Now he is ineligible. That should make the national championship game a little easier!
4. The timing of this decision shows favoritism to Auburn because of championships and the Heisman. Wrong. This matter has been under investigation since July and quite possibly since January. It is possible that the NCAA released the ruling with thoughts about the SEC game and the Heisman. However, I would also throw this out there. Auburn, the SEC, the NCAA, and many others did not want this information public (it is an ongoing investigation). The information was leaked by someone and I have a hard time believing it was the SEC, Auburn, or the NCAA (did anyone hear anything about the ruling Monday?). Therefore the need for this decision was brought about by the “Wizards behind the curtains” who released this info and created mass chaos.
Overall this is a great thing for Auburn and Cam Newton. War Eagle and see you in Glendale!
I love the title of your post! Aunt S
ReplyDelete