Why has Auburn not sat Cam Newton?

[Jessica4Bama]

Yet another Cam allegation, this one far more serious for AU | Mark Bradley

Interesting. I wonder if he will play Saturday? My guess. Yes.

 

[GoBama#1]

Don't forget that there is significant time pressure here as well. If AU keeps winning, they will very likely be in the BCS Championship game. Does the NCAA rule that he is ineligible, perhaps wrongfully denying AU the chance to play in the game if it is later discovered that nothing wrong occurred? Or do they let him play, potentially winning the whole thing, and keep pursuing the whole matter a la USC and Reggie Bush?

I hate to say it, but if you don't have an absolutely ironclad smoking gun you probably should err toward eligibility in a case like this.

They won't sacrifice accuracy for being quick. When issues involve current players, the NCAA moves quickly-just look at some of our situations, Marcel Dareus, Ingram, Julio etc...the matters were resolved quickly and accurately. Our cooperation helped speed things along. IF AU is squeakly clean, it is in their interest to cooperate.

 

[BamaGoose]

Interesting. I wonder if he will play Saturday? My guess. Yes.

Unless the NCAA declares him ineligible, Cam will continue to play. The Boogers will not set him. The Barners are "all in."

 

[RollinTider1335]

If he does, is that a direct violation of the rules? If so, how could they play him??

Oh no wait. This is Auburn we are talking about. My bad.

 

[Vinny]

Unless the NCAA declares him ineligible, Cam will continue to play. The Boogers will not set him. The Barners are "all in."

It is "All in the Family" :biggrin:

 

[Crimson Cat]

If these allegations had been new to Auburn, they would have been forced to sit him pending an investigation. However, Auburn and the SEC knew about this before the season, and their internal "investigation" determined he was eligible. (Or, at least they decided to risk it.) At this point, Auburn has no choice but to stick by their guns and claim that they've found nothing that violates NCAA rules.

One of two things will happen:

1) Nothing more substantial will be discovered, and Auburn can go as far as Cam will carry them.

2) Evidence that Cam was bought will come out and Auburn will have to forfeit every game that he played in. What's the point in sitting him to avoid forfeiture of Chattanooga, UGA, and Bama in the future? If you forfeit the first 9 games of the season, these last ones will never mean anything anyway if you win them without Cam.

I think Auburn is making the only move they can, regardless of whether these allegations prove true or not.

Solid post...I agree.
The problem is now, I think their investigation happened over the spring & summer, and the ncaa picked it up in July. If new evidence has since become available (ie. audio from MSU booster in Destin last week--so I've heard) they may not be in the clear as first thought, and are now pretty much just have nothing to lose by continuing to play him.

A point to think about - on anything even remotely controversial, the New York Times requires the consent of two editors and their legal department...

Excellent point. This is why I'm a bit bewildered by the local media claiming this is just a smear campaign, in that many are trying to disparage the messengers, in this case NYT and ESPN and FOX reporters.
Again I ask, where has the local media been in all of this? If you think they're wrong come up with your own story that offers proof the other way, and not just all opinion or criticizing someone else's reporting.

 

[TideMan09]

I have no real answer but bear with me and rewind to the year 2000 when Alabama was recruiting Albert Means. The SEC office sent a warning memorandum to all the members not to recruit Albert Means, everyone but Alabama. When asked why Roy Kramer said it was an oversight. Alabama's compliance department called the NCAA and asked if there was any reason for Alabama not to recruit Albert Means and was told no we had a green light to recruit and sign. Just a reminder how dirty the business of College Football can be.

I think The Barners thought they had the bullet proof plan to pay for Cam's services..So they played him..And once the season started..They were either "all in" or let their dirty money go to waste..Go big or don't go at all..Little Brother obviously went "Big"..They're up to their neck already in "Eagle Poo"..Why not let him finish the season out & possibly bring a Moral National Championship..

 

[cbi1972]

I believe the barn is going to get hammered. Something woke up the NCAA this past summer and they are investigating much more these days (as they should). I also believe the FBI would not get involved unless some substantive evidence has come to their attention. They do not operate on "hearsay". If money laundering did occur, then it came from somewhere (i.e. Auburn allegedly).

Of course they do.

 

[GulfCoastTider]

Against the backdrop of the Reggie Bush fiasco, and with the FBI now getting interested in the story, an NCAA investigation of Newton's ultimate arrival on the Plains is a certainty.

When a credible news organization like ESPN.com suggests that both father and son were involved in a "pay for play" scheme, and the subject of the story is a clear leader for the Heisman Trophy, there's no way the NCAA just sits and lets this thing stew in its own juices.

Not after the black eye they got during the Bush matter. Their credibility is at stake.

I'm awaiting confirmation from a DOJ source regarding the motivation for the FBI's sudden "interest" in the case. If my suspicions are correct, the pall cast over the whole affair will demand a full blown investigation.

 

[trenda]

Why not let him finish the season out & possibly bring a Moral National Championship..

And history has shown us that they will grab any championship they can get! :biggrin2:

 

[pc2bama]

Unless the NCAA declares him ineligible, Cam will continue to play. The Boogers will not set him. The Barners are "all in."

Was MD declared inelgible by the NCAA before CNS sat him? If there is a doubt they sit until you here they are "clear" from the NCAA.

**If there is a doubt ya don't dress out**

My understanding is that AU knew there was a ? as to Cam's eligibility. They (NCAA) did not say yes or no. Auburn took the dice and rolled it on the first and every snap #2 taken since. JMO.

 

[TideFan in AU]

Here's a random thought I just had that was interesting. If the barn goes to the SECCG and of course a bowl they will have to forfeit 14 losses. Add that to the 5 last year, and Chizik will again have 19 losses in 2 years.
Posted via Mobile Device

 

[Jessica4Bama]

Here's a random thought I just had that was interesting. If the barn goes to the SECCG and of course a bowl they will have to forfeit 14 losses. Add that to the 5 last year, and Chizik will again have 19 losses in 2 years.
Posted via Mobile Device

Do you live in Auburn? If so, how is the community reacting? Are they still saying he did nothing wrong?

 

[Braveheart]

I don't live in Auburn but my wife is an alum along with my in-laws. At first, they were in complete and total denial. Now, they're taking the tack that "they don't care what Cam did off the field" (?!?!?!!?!?!?). Again, a different type of denial. Unfortunately, that won't work with the NCAA.

They might as well get used to it, Auburn is going to get slammed by the NCAA.

 

[uagirl]

Of course they will continue to play Cam. Even after U$C was stripped of their championship, the players still feel that they won it. They all got to keep their rings, and in their minds and a lot of other people's minds U$C did win the national championship that year no matter what the record books say.

Think about it, in all of those games that we had to forfeit due to our own problems, we still remember those games and think of them as wins or losses as do our opponents and everybody else who watched.

The only issue will be if the NCAA decides to punish them even more for continuing to play him, but at that point all the players, coaches and probably even administration will be gone.

They are truly taking a "win at any cost" attitude. Take the instant gratification now and don't worry about the consequences later. They have waited 53 years to win it all, they don't care that they will most likely have to wait that long again to win another. Not only that, but they are making a name for themselves. It goes back to any publicity is good publicity. Most Americans have never heard of Auburn, know anything about the Barn, probably couldn't even tell you what state it is in. I promise that after this is all said and done, they will know.

 

[UA All the Way]

They'll play Cam simply because they can't win without him, simple as that.

 

[Tidetwin]

They'll play Cam simply because they can't win without him, simple as that.

I asked this question on another thread but another question comes to mind other than the one currently posed. When will somone at AU other than someone associated with the AD's office or the football step forward and say something? Where the heck is the President of the university? The longer we go without hearing a word from anyone but some AD stooge the more it confirms (at least in mind) what a silly banana republic operation they are running down there. If I was a reasonably thoughtful AU alumnus, I would be furious.

 

[bayoutider]

Here's a random thought I just had that was interesting. If the barn goes to the SECCG and of course a bowl they will have to forfeit 14 losses. Add that to the 5 last year, and Chizik will again have 19 losses in 2 years.
Posted via Mobile Device

The wins would not be converted to losses they would just be deleted wins as if they never were played. The losing teams would not be given a win but the loss would not count.

 

[BamaJeff]

The wins would not be converted to losses they would just be deleted wins as if they never were played. The losing teams would not be given a win but the loss would not count.

Yep. People need to remember these wins would be vacated...not forfeited.

 

[bamafaninbham]

Why has Auburn not sat Cam Newton? Jacobs and Chizik have made that clear numerous times. Both have stated (more than once) that Cam has done everything they asked him to do! So there's all the proof you need of his innocence!

Notice that Chizik never has elaborated on what was asked of sCam. My guess its something like this: sCam, don't ever tell anyone that your daddy received money. sCam, don't ever tell anyone where the money came from. sCam, don't get caught cheating. sCam, you won't have to cheat if you go talk to the Dean of the Sociology dept. sCam, try to high five everyone in the student section after each game.