So I guess Cam is just going to get away with it, then? (1 Viewer)

I have zero doubt they asked for that money. I also have zero doubt Cam knew about it. There's no possible way he didn't if the first statement is true. What, were they going to tie him up and force him to go to MSU?

Notice they say "We do not have sufficient evidence". All this means is they can't prove it. It's like when after a challenge, the ref says "The call stands" instead of "The call is confirmed". No proof doesn't equal innocent.

I just hope if AU wins the NC, it isn't revoked in the future when more comes to light.
 
Your blind AU hate is clouding your reasoning. Reggie's family received money while he was at USC. Cam's father was caught shopping his son to MSU. The NCAA has looked looked at all of the Newton's financial records and has not found any money to have changed hands. AU in no way has been connected with this whole situation. Why is it impossible for Cam to know his father was shopping him to MSU?
 
Why is it impossible for Cam to know his father was shopping him to MSU?

Had the transaction gone down, how would Cecil held up his end of the deal? Would he have forced Cam to go there?

If the answer is Cam wanted to go to MSU anyway, what stopped him from going? Logically, it doesn't work without Cam knowing.
 
I for one am glad that Cam was cleared. I think he was the best player in college football and I suspected that his father was money hungry.

I am not sure though that this is over yet. I think there is some validity to the FBI probe into some of AU's boosters and I am not sure they were not involved in illegal recruiting. Regardless, again I am happy Cam was cleared.

He has earned his recognition from his play on the field. He has had an amazing year. Basically I am glad the Cam is innocent, but I am not sure AU is as well.
 
Parents make decisions to ask for $180,000 from recruiters all the time?

What does the answer to that matter? Cecil Newton is obviously a piece of **** and yet another example of a charlatan preacher. he came very close to ruining his son's college football career and losing him money in the NFL.
 
I am not sure though that this is over yet. I think there is some validity to the FBI probe into some of AU's boosters and I am not sure they were not involved in illegal recruiting.

There are two FBI investigations going on here, one involving MSU boosters and one involving a Casino owner that happens to be an AU booster. The FBI probe concerning the Auburn man is a bribery and corruption investigation, not related to Auburn athletics.
 
There are two FBI investigations going on here, one involving MSU boosters and one involving a Casino owner that happens to be an AU booster. The FBI probe concerning the Auburn man is a bribery and corruption investigation, not related to Auburn athletics.

I have heard differently, but that is not surprising. Regardless I am thinking that we will not hear much more for awhile until the FBI is done investigating. Also to be clear I am not saying I hope AU is guilty of anything either. I am just not sure that they are not.
 
1. I do hate Auburn.

2. It is not coloring my opinion on this issue.

I don't understand how there is NO punishment for a immediate family member soliciting funds. It appears that the NCAA has ruled that is exactly what happened, but they have somehow ruled that Cam was completely unaware?

Let's assume that's true for a moment. If ever there was a time where "strict liability" ought to apply, then this is it.
 
Pretty obviously some sort of "deal" was made here. The NCAA has never ever ever acted this fast. Think about how long it took them to rule on Georgia's move to reinstate A.J. Green.
My thoughts are that the NCAA felt the need to do something instead of having a cloud hang over the SEC Championship game and the bowl season so they told Auburn they would rule Cam ineligible and reinstate him before the end of the week.

I know someone in another thread said this was standard operating procedure for the NCAA, but I don't think it is. I have never seen them act this way (although I certainly could be wrong.
 
1. I do hate Auburn.

2. It is not coloring my opinion on this issue.

I don't understand how there is NO punishment for a immediate family member soliciting funds. It appears that the NCAA has ruled that is exactly what happened, but they have somehow ruled that Cam was completely unaware?

Let's assume that's true for a moment. If ever there was a time where "strict liability" ought to apply, then this is it.

So you are suggesting that the NCAA should punish the child for the sins of the father? I fail to see how that is remotely fair.
 
So you are suggesting that the NCAA should punish the child for the sins of the father? I fail to see how that is remotely fair.

For something that happened at a school he didn't even end up at.

Also, this hasn't been quick, it has been going on for many months, the media just got wind of it a few weeks ago. It has been going on since at least the summer, and probably since Jan.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom