• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Cam Newton (QB New England Patriots)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Gatorubet;1965815; said:
You could have played this [Mark May] on the USC board for years and years before they got their ass handed to them. You posting "still waiting" every month during those years would not have meant that the NCAA was not pursuing an investigation, or that USC was not going to get post-season bans, titles stripped, wins vacated, or scholarships reduced.

All it would have meant is that the NCAA did not give a rat's ass about JCOSU86's self imposed time table for the announcement of the conclusion of the investigation. The NCAA does not have subpoena power. The NCAA could not have issued subpoenas for Tress's e-mails. The NCAA cannot issue subpoenas for Cam's dad's church. So unless Auburn self reports Gene's e-mail confirming the 180K to Cam because of an internal search revelation, they have to wait for other ways to track it down.

The lack of the ability to compel people is a problem. See Pryor telling the NCAA to stuff it. See Bush saying stuff it. See Cam saying stuff it. See <insert player> telling the NCAA to stuff it. The NCAA rules are the rules, and a delay in getting the goods on bad guys - like in the Cam situation - is as often the result of the weak investigatory power that the NCAA wields as it is a blind eye to misconduct. I keep telling you - if any Bama fan can dig it up, they will. Sit tight and it will work itself out.
Click to expand...

Your posting this is not going to stop JCOSU86 from posting 'still waiting' periodically.
 
Upvote 0
BB73;1965843; said:
Your posting this is not going to stop JCOSU86 from posting 'still waiting' periodically.
Click to expand...
'Course not. If I wanted him to stop saying it, I'd say "stop saying that." But I would not do that, because, one, that would be stupid, and two, he'd rightfully tell me to [censored] off, that he could post what he wanted to post. And I'd agree with him.

But he states that the NCAA is covering up the dirty SEC violations in a way that is different than other conference investigations. "[censored]ing SEC cheaters are going to get away with murder" I believe he said. He is inventing a reality where the only possible explanation for the NCAA not quickly finding proof of a Cam payoff (using the NCAA's weak investigation tools) is the NCAA covering up a dirty SEC on purpose.

I disagree strongly. I think that is a silly, albeit popular, conclusion, and simply point to the length of time it took for Reggie and USC to get hammered. The speed with which the recent troubles at tOSU are being handled is very much NOT the norm, time wise, than almost all other investigations, including the protracted FSU problems I watched develop for several years. Delay did not mean cover up.
 
Upvote 0
When a relationship, via contract, is entered into by various parties, rights and obligations are traded between the respective parties. The right to remain "silent" between parties can be extended or diminished with little to no reference to any kind of bill of rights. Contracts, with some public policy constraints, can be fashioned in such a way so as to guarantee full transparency between the parties, and when parties elect not to uphold those contractual transparencies, then that same contract can afford the offended parties meaningful remedies.

As applied here, the relevant parties are the scholarship athlete, his/her respective school, the organizational entity (NCAA perhaps) and any third party beneficiaries of the various intermingled "contracts" involved, i.e., the scholarship grant to the student authorized by the school as well as the organizational entity's regulation by which all member schools are to benefit, adhere and abide.

In this case, if the NCAA membership (NCAA is only an authority by agreement of its membership and reflects only the collective will of that membership) were to say, hey, if a school's student athlete refuses to cooperate in an otherwise legitimate inquiry by the organization entity, here is the rather stiff penalty for the school (money, scholarships, participation) then that's pretty much the end of it as far as the school goes.

And if the NCAA required every scholarship relationship to be governed by its rules, and if the scholarship athlete agreed to the terms of the conditions of his/her scholarship, including a formula for liquidated damages caused to both to the NCAA and the school for failure to submit to the organizations legitimate inquiry, then cases of nose-thumbing athletes would be addressed, not only within the organizational framework but also by way of access to the subpoena power of the courts.

With subpoena power comes the availability of contempt sanctions. It is up to the members of the organizational entity whether or not they wish to be collectively governed in this manner. And it would be up to the student whether he/she wished to submit to this authority by accepting a D1 scholarship.
 
Upvote 0
buckford;1966169; said:
jlb1705,

Have I ever said anything so nasty about you? Next thing you know, you'll be calling me a Gator fan.

:tongue2:



xxxxxxx
Click to expand...

I don't think he'd stoop that low to call you a Gator fan. A lawyer, yes. (I hope Ubet takes the fifth on a response to this.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0
Gatorubet;1965986; said:
'Course not. If I wanted him to stop saying it, I'd say "stop saying that." But I would not do that, because, one, that would be stupid, and two, he'd rightfully tell me to [censored] off, that he could post what he wanted to post. And I'd agree with him.

But he states that the NCAA is covering up the dirty SEC violations in a way that is different than other conference investigations. "[censored]ing SEC cheaters are going to get away with murder" I believe he said. He is inventing a reality where the only possible explanation for the NCAA not quickly finding proof of a Cam payoff (using the NCAA's weak investigation tools) is the NCAA covering up a dirty SEC on purpose.

I disagree strongly. I think that is a silly, albeit popular, conclusion, and simply point to the length of time it took for Reggie and USC to get hammered. The speed with which the recent troubles at tOSU are being handled is very much NOT the norm, time wise, than almost all other investigations, including the protracted FSU problems I watched develop for several years. Delay did not mean cover up.
Click to expand...

Not saying the NCAA is covering it up at all. What I am saying is that the media drumbeat of ESPN and others against Ohio State and their complete lack of care against SEC teams are nothing more than the result of monied interests pursuing things because of business relationships. Ask anyone who about SEC recruiting and they will say something to the effect that "it's a different ballgame down there". What I'm saying is that Buckeye players sold their own stuff and self-report and get the reputation as cheaters. While the SEC has raised cheating to an art form and they are praised for being the best conference in the game.
 
Upvote 0
JCOSU86;1966178; said:
Not saying the NCAA is covering it up at all. What I am saying is that the media drumbeat of ESPN and others against Ohio State and their complete lack of care against SEC teams are nothing more than the result of monied interests pursuing things because of business relationships. Ask anyone who about SEC recruiting and they will say something to the effect that "it's a different ballgame down there".
Click to expand...

You keep linking the amount of time that goes by without - I dunno - some event that will satisfy you that Cam and Auburn will not skate on the alleged pay for play, continually implying that the NCAA has no interest in hammering them - because they have not yet done whatever the Hell you want them to have done by the date of each of your posts.

That was why I discussed the investigatory powers issue and the time frame issue as it relates to those weakened discovery powers.

JCOSU86;1966178; said:
What I'm saying is that Buckeye players sold their own stuff and self-report and get the reputation as cheaters. While the SEC has raised cheating to an art form and they are praised for being the best conference in the game.
Click to expand...

Your description of the recent NCAA unpleasantness is certainly shaped by your loyalty to tOSU and how you interpret the whole mess. There is an alternate "take" on that by fans of other programs as it relates to how a reputation is - call it earned - that sees it differently. The feeding frenzy and piling on by the media was improper, but hardly surprising. Much of the PR disaster was self inflicted. But none of those issues, your interpretation or how they look at y'all at -say - Clemson - has anything to do with whether Auburn or Cam will "get off" even though they cheated.

Here is a timeline of the whole deal. Like I said, the Bammers can be counted on to monitor this and to aid and assist the NCAA however they can.....
http://www.ibleedcrimsonred.com/p/cam-newton-investigation-timeline.html

Cam's dad was sent a request for financial information in October of 2010 by the NCAA, so we know it had started an investigation by that date at the latest.

Here is the NCAA on the Cam Newton eligibility issue, stating that it was handled independently of the infractions group.

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect...esident+Mark+Emmert+on+Cam+Newton+Eligibility

I would hardly call a ham handed parent asking for money to sign a son "raising cheating to an art form". And I don't think that Cam's dad was so tricksy hobbitish that it is beyond the ability of the NCAA to find out what happened. I do question why you think the timeline is so deficient in quickness that you conclude that nothing will come of it.


 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top