Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Kentucky Basketball: Where the Wildcats Stand as of Today

Mark Emmert Would Kindly Like You to Stop Bashing His Organization

I don't know if any back room deals went down to get Cam Newton's eligibility cleared up this week. I suspect some did happen, but I can't be sure. If there were some, they completely backfired for those involved. The outcome of the eligibility decision and the timing of it only seemed to make non-Auburn college football fans even angrier about the Newton case.

Seeing how public opinion has violently turned against his organization, NCAA President Mark Emmert put out a statement this evening:

We recognize that many people are outraged at the notion that a parent or anyone else could "shop around" a student-athlete and there would possibly not be repercussions on the student-athlete's eligibility.

I'm committed to further clarifying and strengthening our recruiting and amateurism rules so they promote appropriate behavior by students, parents, coaches and third parties. We will work aggressively with our members to amend our bylaws so that this type of behavior is not a part of intercollegiate athletics.

That's all that's from Emmert directly, but hit the link because it fully explains the NCAA's decision-making process. The most important part of this statement is that it acknowledges that Cecil Newton's actions largely fell through the cracks of NCAA bylaws. The simple fact is that no one ever expected a parent to solicit a payment from one school, not get it, and send his son to a different school for no payment.

The rest of it is worth reading, but it does boil down into these three points:

  1. This week's decision signals that the NCAA believes Cam Newton personally did no wrong. It does not anticipate getting any evidence to the contrary in the future.
  2. Everything else is still on the table with this investigation, including issuing penalties to the schools involved.
  3. Please stop bashing us. And you're never going to get all the information that we have, so don't hold your breath.

I think this is about all the NCAA can do at this point. It's a bureaucracy that lives by its bureaucratic nature and has red tape flowing through its veins. It has its processes to follow, and Emmert himself confessed that the rules allowed for this exact situation to play out as it did.

But is it enough to calm America down? My guess: not a chance.

Comment 14 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Rope, Tree, NCAA...Some Assembly Required

The reason the cover-up, deal, bargain or whatever you want to call it isn’t working is that it defies both rational thought and all previous NCAA precedent. They have NEVER cut a deal for an athlete like this before. What Cecil did doesn’t fall through a crack in the rules unless you want the crack to be there. He solicited money for his son’s services. MSU, AU and NCAA all agree this is true. They also agree it was a violation of amateur status that rendered his son ineligible.

The problem with their scheme is that somehow said ineglibility only applies on a random Tuesday in December when it doesn’t incovenience his team. Did new information come to Auburn or the NCAA on Monday that changed things? Ha. What they knew on Monday they have known (according to them) since July. There is no possible way in which Newton is ineligible now that he wasn’t inegligible before.

I defy anyone to produce evidence of another eligibility dispute resolved in such a fashion. Like the court of the Red Queen in Alice in Wonderland, the NCAA figured out the sentence first and then had the trial to arrive at the predetermined verdict. Saves a lot of time that way I guess. There have been many instances where the NCAA has ignored both their written rules and precedents in order to punish an institution to the level they saw fit (as a Bama fan I’m painfully aware of their history in this regard). In this case they ignored written rule and precedent to let an offender off the hook.

And whether a “student-athlete” like $cam personally benefitted or not has never been the standard of eligibility before. Under the rule it doesn’t matter. His father solicited illegal payments. Even if none were paid (anyone interested in this really nice bridge I have for sale in Brooklyn? It’s real cheap.) the NCAA and Auburn both agree that his act itself was a violation. Otherwise there would be no need for a declaration of inelgibility and reinstatement.

The NCAA has handed an engraved invitation to cheat to anyone who wants to use it. They deserve all the slings and arrows they are receiving—they pulled down their own house upon their head, and they shouldn’t cry foul when some of us point it out.

by Watchman on Dec 2, 2010 11:37 PM EST reply actions  

Perfect summarization

This has nothing to do with South Carolina v. Auburn. This has to do with whether people respect honor, integrity and the rule of law in CFB. Period.

And the answer is – at least for the NCAA, the SEC and Auburn University – that the answer is no. Otherwise, no one would have participated in this kabuki theater show.

There are specific NCAA and SEC rules that cover what we now know Cecil Newton did with representatives of Mississippi State University. They are hard rules. But they are fair rules. The NCAA and the SEC declined to enforce them. Both institutions talk about the need to “fix” them now so that there will be no further “loopholes”. Shame.

Those “loopholes” exist because NCAA president Mark Emmert and SEC Commissioner Mike Slive conspired with Auburn Universtity A.D. Jay Jacobs and Compliance Director Rich McGlynn in order to exploit the rules. Why? Because under NCAA and SEC rules, Cam Newton was ineligible whether (a) he knew what his father was doing; (b) whether he personally received a penny; or ( c) whether he attended Miss. State.

How do I know there was a conspiracy? Because over the course of three days, the NCAA, the SEC and Auburn orchestrated a series of events – previously unheralded in the history of major infraction investigations – all done behind closed doors, totally out of the public spotlight and without any disclosure (not even a hint) that they were ongoing.

Monday – Auburn and NCAA investigators finalize agreement on a joint set of facts. These facts are presented to the SEC
.
Tuesday – Auburn disqualifies Cam Newton, then appeals its own decision to the NCAA.

Wednesday – the NCAA appeals committee meets (on one day’s notice) and reinstates Cam Newton. The SEC concurs later in the day, and refuses to enforce its own more rigorous (yet applicable) by-laws. The news is then released to the media.

It was likely timed so that Cam didn’t even miss a practice. In keeping with Newton Family tradition, I wonder if Gene Chizik even told Cam it was going on – I mean we wouldn’t to break his focus would we? Cam’s perfectly content to go through life letting other people make decisions for him, apparently. The whole sordid mess was such a feel good outcome that Cam’s daddy is still going to get to come to the Big Game in Atlanta (and the one in Glendale that is so much more important to all concerned). He just has to “distance” himself from the Auburn program – but not, you know, to the extent it might make Cam feel bad or anything before the Big Game. And since the whitewash is in full effect, even Mississippi State gets a slap on the wrist. Can’t have anyone or any institution really getting punished, can we? Then someone on the inside might actually scream the whole thing was unfair!

Well, the whole thing makes me sick. It should make any reasonable person slick.

First, it insults my intelligence. It says Im just an Auburn “hater” if I refuse to accept that Cecil Newton was soliciting big money from one of the poorest and smallest of the SEC athletic departments/fanbases but had no intention of soliciting money from one of the richest – despite the fact his son had publicly stated a preference for the smaller school throughout recruting. Sure. That’s believable. I mean, after all, its not like Auburn has ever done anything like that before? Right? Oh, wait … never mind. You say there’s no evidence of Auburn wrongdoing? I say you haven’t begun to look. And now you don’t intend to look. Auburn, the SEC and the NCAA are hear no evil, see no evil and certainly will speak no evil. How proud y’all must be. Racketeering for the greater good. I hope everyone got down to go down to Victoryland for drinks and steaks after – all except Cam of course who is preparing for the big game in total, infantile ignorance and bliss, under his Aubie securitiy blanket.

Second, it only reinforces the notion that there are two sets of rules. One for the SEC haves. And another SEC have-nots. All the Auburn whining about “War Eagle v. the World” is shown to be complete bullshit. The closer your school is to Birmingham the more benefits you will derive from the SEC, and the more protection is lavished upon you. South Carolina players didn’t pay their hotel bills on time and were publicly humiliated in the media, and their Athletic Department never had a chance to agree to a joint set of facts with the NCAA, nor have the full cooperation and support of the SEC, for a minor sin that resulted in no outright suspensions. In other words, were put through the ringer for a misdemeanor. On the other hand, a pay-for-play scandal involving Auburn’s star QB gets unprecedented special kid glove treatment… guilt, punishment, reinstatement all in three days, rather than the NCAA’s usual months and years.

Heck, the Lord created the Heavens and the Earth in seven days, but Auburn and the SEC got Cam whitewashed in three! Miracle! Hallelujah!

They wore garnet helmets.

by tryptic67 on Dec 3, 2010 6:54 AM EST up reply actions  

I really just don't understand why they did this in first place

If you know its not fully investigated to this point, why even do the ineligible then reinstated stuff. I mean, I just think they thought thru the PR aspect of this. If this is truly what happened, and thats all there is to it, that would be one thing, but the fact that they have left it so open ended just makes me scratch my head. I realize that they want it out there that he eligible as it stands right now, but its just such a strange way to handle it in my mind.

by BamaThrasher on Dec 3, 2010 1:11 AM EST reply actions  

If I'm reading the NCAA correctly

Every investigation of a violation surrounding a student-athlete has two pieces: eligibility and enforcement. Eligibility surrounds whether the student-athlete personally did something wrong. Enforcement covers everything else.

Once the NCAA feels it has a handle on the eligibility, it goes ahead knocks that piece out. That appears to be what happened here. They thought they had all the facts necessary to make an eligibility judgment, so they made it.

The only weird thing is how quickly it went down. For instance, Jeremiah Masoli enrolled was denied immediate eligibility at Ole Miss on August 31. He then won his appeal four days later on September 3. Dillon Baxter’s golf cart ride got him ineligible on November 19, and he was reinstated five days later after he gave $5 to charity to “offset” the ostensible value of the ride.

In both those cases, the NCAA worked relatively quickly. It took four and five days, respectively, to clear up eligibility questions. However, it’s nothing compared to the 24 hour return time Auburn got with Newton.

I can’t see any way of not believing that a deal was cut behind the scenes given the existence of the fact sheet that the NCAA and Auburn agreed upon. With Baxter, for instance, USC declared him ineligible as soon as it found out something happened. Auburn had been sitting on the information about Cam for weeks before it made him ineligible and applied for reinstatement.

Team Speed Kills -- SBNation's SEC Blog
If you're so inclined, follow me @Year2

by Year2 on Dec 3, 2010 7:43 AM EST up reply actions  

If this is true
Eligibility surrounds whether the student-athlete personally did something wrong.

And the NCAA is gungho on claiming Cam had no knowledge of what was going on… thus the loop hole…

Then why did they declare him ineligible at all?

Really? What was the reason for declaring him ineligible. Because you can’t sit here and say that the player is ineligible because his father asked for money, then say he’s eligible because it didn’t really matter… it’s either, he’s still ineligible because that broke the rules, or you never declare him as such since he didn’t know what was going on and THATS the story they have. It’s just one big contradiction. They would have done a lot better had they never claimed he was ineligible. I mean, it would have still been a bullshit ruling, but at least it would have been consistent.

by knowshon loves legos on Dec 3, 2010 9:58 AM EST up reply actions  

As far as I can tell, that was procedural red tape

If a violation occurs and a player is more than tangentially related, then the player must be declared ineligible. No ifs, ands, or buts. Cecil Newton shopped his son, so that’s a violation and Cam had to be declared ineligible because of it. However, Cam’s ignorance of what happened was judged to be a mitigating factor, and therefore he was reinstated.

What makes this case different than others is that Auburn didn’t declare Newton until after the school and the NCAA decided on a set of facts in the case. The normal timeline, as far as I can tell is:

Discovery of potential violation > ineligible > NCAA decides on facts > reinstatement.

Here, it went:

Discovery of potential violation > NCAA decides on facts > ineligible > reinstatement.

Team Speed Kills -- SBNation's SEC Blog
If you're so inclined, follow me @Year2

by Year2 on Dec 3, 2010 10:44 AM EST up reply actions  

Don't think that USC wont use this in their appeal of their two year bowl ban.

Pat Haden was one of the first to come out with a statement. It’s actually quite clever b/c when their appeal is heard i’ll bet they just get a 1 year bowl penalty. Since 98% of the decisions that come from the ncaa are political i would say that usc gets its wish and only gets a 1 year bowl ban. 38 million people in california (alot of fans) are hard to ignore for a potential usc bowl game no matter the bowl. I can’t see usc doing better than 7-5 or maybe even 6-6 next year so they goto the vegs bowl.

Why do canadians stick together? The same reason why Chris Horodecki turned his body and face around in his first WEC fight.

by wolfmanshowlforever on Dec 3, 2010 12:39 PM EST up reply actions  

I doubt it

There are some huge differences between the cases, according to what the NCAA believes happened (which is what I’m citing below).

Reggie Bush’s parents received lots of extra benefits. No money changed hands with the Newtons.

Bush knew what his parents were doing. Cam did not.

USC assistant coach Todd McNair knew about the deal. Auburn didn’t know about Cecil’s solicitations, and Mississippi State turned him down and reported it.

Bush refused to talk to the NCAA. Cam, his father, and his mother have all talked to and cooperated with investigators.

Team Speed Kills -- SBNation's SEC Blog
If you're so inclined, follow me @Year2

by Year2 on Dec 3, 2010 1:17 PM EST up reply actions  

i hate to tell you this but there is no way of knowing if cam newton knew what his dad did.

no way of knowing. they just have to take his word and since he had a few incidents when he was at florida i would say his word is suspect. trust me, i’m no usc fan either. my team plays them in the second game of next season and i hope we kick their azz.

Why do canadians stick together? The same reason why Chris Horodecki turned his body and face around in his first WEC fight.

by wolfmanshowlforever on Dec 4, 2010 12:25 PM EST up reply actions  

red tape??

red tape??? you mean the enforcement of their own freaking rules. you say that and it sounds glib like ‘Oh, i guess we should ban this guy since it’s in the rules and all and he broke them’… i mean, that’s the whole issue here. if they felt they had to do that because the situation mandated it, that’s all you need to know ppl. that’s what i can’t get over. you say it’s ‘procedural’ and then wave it off like it’s no big deal. But that procedure is in place for when the rules are broken and they acted upon it because the rules were broken. Then they basically change there minds about it. I would have less of an issue if they never declared him ineligible i guess.

by knowshon loves legos on Dec 3, 2010 2:28 PM EST up reply actions  

What I’m saying is that if this wasn’t the NCAA, he probably wouldn’t have gone through an equivalent to being declared ineligibile.

The image that this matter puts forth I think is that of a court of law: by declaring him ineligible, the NCAA found Newton guilty. Then by reinstating him, it found him not guilty again on appeal.

I don’t think that’s quite right though. If this were being prosecuted in a court of law, Cam wouldn’t have even gone to trial. Any charges against him would have been thrown out for lack of evidence.

But the NCAA couldn’t do that, because it’s not a court. It has procedures it has to follow, and one of them was Cam being declared ineligibile because his family was involved in a violation. Reinstating him 24 hours later is the NCAA’s equivalent of then throwing out the charges.

Team Speed Kills -- SBNation's SEC Blog
If you're so inclined, follow me @Year2

by Year2 on Dec 3, 2010 2:45 PM EST up reply actions  

right.

and since they seemingly did it all behind doors, why even go through the motions of declaring him. to save face and show they follow the rules? well yeah, that really worked in their favor now didn’t it.

it’s so transparent that they didn’t ever want to (or intend to) keep him ineligible. so why insult everyone’s intellignece by doing so.

by knowshon loves legos on Dec 3, 2010 3:42 PM EST up reply actions  

“The simple fact is that no one ever expected a parent to solicit a payment from one school, not get it, and send his son to a different school for no payment.”

This strikes me as utter BS. It didn’t occur to them that an athlete (or his agents) might ask for money, but not get it? In other words, their working assumption is that, if an athlete asks for money, the school will hand it over. I think that tells you a lot about the NCAA.

Don't Panic.

by 4.0 Point Stance on Dec 3, 2010 1:19 PM EST reply actions  

The rulebook grows as the glom new stuff on the old stuff. They patch holes as they find them and I think this is the first anyone has heard of this particular hole.

Team Speed Kills -- SBNation's SEC Blog
If you're so inclined, follow me @Year2

by Year2 on Dec 3, 2010 2:36 PM EST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about the SEC

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Gator-f__custom__small
FSU/Clemson to the Big 12 Rumors: Here's the Deal
Small
14 team Basketball Schedule
4c06a6adb42798a5c08d712c620047ec_small
Why Can't This Work

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Gabalogo2_small cocknfire

Gator-f__custom__small Year2

Authors

Kleph_logo_copy_small kleph