Same Headline: Different Article

[AUChizad]

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/columns/bryan-burwell/article_8bc7ca7f-2ef7-5c53-8c94-5a43ab814e50.html

NCAA did right thing in Newton case

BY BRYAN BURWELL
December 3, 2010 12:10 am

Nov. 26, 2010 -- Quarterback Cam Newton has been cleared to play Saturday in the SEC championship game.

I have a friend at the NCAA who has on occasion reminded me that his organization is not responsible for every foul deed in the world of college athletics, even if I have a nasty habit of consistently inviting them to be a featured guest at every literary lynch mob I tend to assemble.

Yes, I have had my issues with the NCAA (a lot of issues, actually), which is why it's with great surprise that I'm about to utter these words:

The NCAA handled the complexities of the Cam Newton investigation properly.

Yeah, they got it right. They didn't play favorites, they didn't use double standards. They didn't change the rules to facilitate some diabolical conspiracy to ensure the legitimacy of what's left of college football's so-called national championship season.

When the NCAA earlier this week cleared Auburn's Cam Newton of any wrongdoing in an alleged pay-for-play scam involving his father — who they did believe tried to pimp his son out to the highest bidder — it was a move that showed the evolving practicality of an organization that has been notoriously lacking in such qualities for far too long.

A lot of outraged voices are condemning the NCAA, insisting that it is playing fast and loose with enforcement of its rules against cheating. But I am having a hard time understanding what else they could have ruled in this case. There is no proof that he did anything wrong. There's plenty of evidence that his father, Cecil, acted shamefully, attempting to sell his own child's services to a Mississippi State recruiter. But NCAA investigators could not unearth any evidence that Cam Newton knowingly participated or benefited from the shameless auction conducted by his father.

Since no money exchanged hands, and at least for the time being, it still isn't against NCAA rules for someone to ask for money (only to accept it), what was the NCAA supposed to do with Newton? You can't suspend people because you think they cheated. You can't kick a guy off a team or rule him ineligible because it doesn't feel right.

"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," NCAA president Mark Emmert said in a prepared statement on the organization's website. "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."
In other words, Emmert knows that the language in those rules needs to change to make it clear that solicitation of illegal benefits is just as bad as getting those benefits. But until that language is cleared up, Newton's dad is the only bad guy in this case, not the kid. The actions of the NCAA in this case shows some enlightened thinking.

Emmert's people didn't feel they had to act harshly against Newton to satisfy any silly grumbling from the folks at Southern California, who want to believe they were treated harshly in the Reggie Bush case.
Well, let's see now. Tell me how unfair was it to throw down the full weight of the NCAA rule book at USC when Bush's family took thousands of dollars in cash, lived in a house rent free for a year, and a Trojan assistant coach was linked directly to the case by the NCAA investigation?

No double standard here, at least not yet. Until there is evidence that the Newtons actually got cash or extra benefits, you can't throw the book at them. No proof, no punishment. There is no comparison, there is no conspiracy. As the NCAA noted, one size doesn't fit all.

The timing of the NCAA clearing Newton now makes it easy for anyone with a Heisman Trophy vote to do what makes sense. The ballots are due Monday for the Heisman, and I know what I am doing with my vote.

Newton's name will be on the top of my Heisman ballot, and I'm doing it without any sense of shame or regret.

I felt this way even before the NCAA ruling. The Heisman Trust on its website claims, "The Heisman Memorial Trophy annually recognizes the outstanding college football player whose performance best exhibits the pursuit of excellence and integrity."

A noble goal, indeed, yet a completely unrealistic one. As history tells us, athletes have consistently won this prestigious award for only one reason and one reason alone, excellence on the field, not integrity off the field.

Some past winners, like Reggie Bush and Johnny Rodgers, were involved in scandal while in college. Others, like O.J. Simpson, Billy Cannon, Charles White and Mike Garrett, were all wrapped in tremendous scandals after they won the award.

So why start adding integrity to the process now?

It's a bronze football award, not Diogenes' lantern. We're not pious men roaming the streets in search of an honest man. We're voters seeking to identify the most outstanding athlete in this college football season.

For nearly 30 years off and on, I have been casting my vote for the Heisman, and it is not a trifling event in my life, and I imagine the majority of my fellow voters take the task as seriously as I do. I watch as many college football games live or on television as I can so that I can see firsthand the best players in the country with my own eyes.

And every Saturday since this season began, the best and brightest college player in the country turned out to be Cam Newton.

So until someone provides evidence that he doesn't deserve it, Newton will get my vote.

[Snaggletiger]

Our local sports talk guy said this morning, "Look, unless something earth shattering comes out later...and it's not going to happen because this thing has been investigated by everyone under the sun..this thing is over!!!! So all you people out there screaming and wishing for the death penalty for Auburn, get over it.  It's over."

Not that he is anything more than another opinion out there, I was so glad to hear it (And read it above) so that we may finally get some sense of concentrating on and enjoying some college football.

[RWS]

The NCAA did do the right thing by their standards. Apparently the loophole in the rule is an oversight that the president of the NCAA himself has even said they must fix. Like I said in the whole Jeremiah Masoli thing when the NCAA said he was ineligible because his situation didn't fit the "spirit of the rule"; fuck the spirit of a rule. Either it is or it isn't. Alot of people right now are screaming about the spirit of the rule, and I don't blame them. There should be repercussions for what happened.

If a player attends a party put on by an NFLPA agent and the student claims he didn't know it was sponsored by the agent, he is going to have to sit a game or two. If a player or his family talks to an NFLPA certified agent about the kid playing pro, and the kid says he didn't know about it, he will be riding the pine in a heartbeat. But you're telling me a parent can talk to an NFLPA certified agent who also happens to be a booster to a team about pay-for-play, and that's just OK? It's not right. However, the rules are the rules.

The NCAA fucked up when they made the rule and didn't cover their bases. Fix it next season to where this can never happen again. But don't pull a rule out of your ass, or pull the "spirit of the rule" bullshit. 

[Snaggletiger]

The NCAA did do the right thing by their standards. Apparently the loophole in the rule is an oversight that the president of the NCAA himself has even said they must fix. Like I said in the whole Jeremiah Masoli thing when the NCAA said he was ineligible because his situation didn't fit the "spirit of the rule"; fuck the spirit of a rule. Either it is or it isn't. Alot of people right now are screaming about the spirit of the rule, and I don't blame them. There should be repercussions for what happened.

If a player attends a party put on by an NFLPA agent and the student claims he didn't know it was sponsored by the agent, he is going to have to sit a game or two. If a player or his family talks to an NFLPA certified agent about the kid playing pro, and the kid says he didn't know about it, he will be riding the pine in a heartbeat. But you're telling me a parent can talk to an NFLPA certified agent who also happens to be a booster to a team about pay-for-play, and that's just OK? It's not right. However, the rules are the rules.

The NCAA fucked up when they made the rule and didn't cover their bases. Fix it next season to where this can never happen again. But don't pull a rule out of your ass, or pull the "spirit of the rule" bullshit.

Goes all the way back to Albert Means.  Should have been fixed then.

[War Eagle!!!]

There should be repercussions for what happened.

1. What happened? No money changed hands and the kid is not even playing where his father discussed money. There is no evidence that money was ever discussed with where he IS playing school.

2. What do you think the repercussions should be and why?

[The Prowler]

1. What happened? No money changed hands and the kid is not even playing where his father discussed money. There is no evidence that money was ever discussed with where he IS playing school.

2. What do you think the repercussions should be and why?

This should be interesting...

[Snaggletiger]

 

Still waiting.  The NCAA, SEC, AU, MSU, FBI, CIA, KGB and a BLT with heavy mayo all investigated it and have been since July.  They said they found no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Cameron Newton or Auburn University.  Why is it YOU think there should be repurcussions?  Because Redfish said so?

[GH2001]

Still waiting.  The NCAA, SEC, AU, MSU, FBI, CIA, KGB and a BLT with heavy mayo all investigated it and have been since July.  They said they found no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Cameron Newton or Auburn University.  Why is it YOU think there should be repurcussions?  Because Redfish said so?

 

ZOLTAN!

[Snaggletiger]

 

ZOLTAN!

Damn...ZOLTAN.

[The Prowler]

Damn...ZOLTAN.

Give him some time....it takes a while to put on his *pop-pop* suit.

[War Eagle!!!]

Still waiting.  The NCAA, SEC, AU, MSU, FBI, CIA, KGB and a BLT with heavy mayo all investigated it and have been since July.  They said they found no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Cameron Newton or Auburn University.  Why is it YOU think there should be repurcussions?  Because Redfish said so?

Not to mention that the reports say that Cecil "shopped" his son. I have a hard time believing that Cam is eligible if Cecil in fact shopped him. I think there is nothing here more than a mention of money...but definitely not shopping his son for money. And who is to say that the offer wasn't brought to Cecil. Hell, Cecil may have thought he was just talking with a "friend" in Kenny Rogers and didn't actually think there was much chance of it happening.

I have no idea, and to point, neither does anyone else screaming that there should be repercussions...

[Snaggletiger]

Not to mention that the reports say that Cecil "shopped" his son. I have a hard time believing that Cam is eligible if Cecil in fact shopped him. I think there is nothing here more than a mention of money...but definitely not shopping his son for money. And who is to say that the offer wasn't brought to Cecil. Hell, Cecil may have thought he was just talking with a "friend" in Kenny Rogers and didn't actually think there was much chance of it happening.

I have no idea, and to point, neither does anyone else screaming that there should be repercussions...

Wouldn't you love to see the percentage of intraweb rumors and accusations that actually came true?  I mean some of them do because if enough people scream enough different scenarios....someone is going to be right.  I'm going with .00746%

[AUTailgatingRules]

The NCAA did do the right thing by their standards. Apparently the loophole in the rule is an oversight that the president of the NCAA himself has even said they must fix. Like I said in the whole Jeremiah Masoli thing when the NCAA said he was ineligible because his situation didn't fit the "spirit of the rule"; fuck the spirit of a rule. Either it is or it isn't. Alot of people right now are screaming about the spirit of the rule, and I don't blame them. There should be repercussions for what happened.

If a player attends a party put on by an NFLPA agent and the student claims he didn't know it was sponsored by the agent, he is going to have to sit a game or two. If a player or his family talks to an NFLPA certified agent about the kid playing pro, and the kid says he didn't know about it, he will be riding the pine in a heartbeat. But you're telling me a parent can talk to an NFLPA certified agent who also happens to be a booster to a team about pay-for-play, and that's just OK? It's not right. However, the rules are the rules.

The NCAA fucked up when they made the rule and didn't cover their bases. Fix it next season to where this can never happen again. But don't pull a rule out of your ass, or pull the "spirit of the rule" bullshit.

Let me at least help you get your facts straight.  KENNY ROGERS IS NOT A CERTIFIED NFLPA AGENT, he is actually in a whole lot of shit from the NFL for falsely claiming to be such.

[Snaggletiger]

Let me at least help you get your facts straight.  KENNY ROGERS IS NOT A CERTIFIED NFLPA AGENT, he is actually in a whole lot of shit from the NFL for falsely claiming to be such.

Damn it man, Jim from Tuscaloosa said he was so it must be so.  Do not question what is said by Redfish, Shane and other experts on the intrawebz.

[The Prowler]

Let me at least help you get your facts straight.  KENNY ROGERS IS NOT A CERTIFIED NFLPA AGENT, he is actually in a whole lot of shit from the NFL for falsely claiming to be such.

Whore shit...redfish, Thayer, Shane & Clay say so.

[RWS]

Still waiting.  The NCAA, SEC, AU, MSU, FBI, CIA, KGB and a BLT with heavy mayo all investigated it and have been since July.  They said they found no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Cameron Newton or Auburn University.  Why is it YOU think there should be repurcussions?  Because Redfish said so?

Like I said before, there are repercussions for a kid attending a party thrown by an agent when he didn't know it was the agent throwing it. There are repercussions for a kid's family talking to an agent about a NFL deal for a kid. Rogers isn't actually an NFLPA certified agent, however, he is a "runner" for one; Ian Greengross, who heads Game Sports and Entertainment. The NCAA doesn't really care if it is an actual agent or runner, for that matter. Why is it those previous two infractions will land your ass in a jam, especially the rule about parents talking to an agent/runner about an NFL deal (even if an agreement isn't made), but your father talking to a runner about pay-for-play at the college level is a-OK?  I agree that there is no evidence of any wrongdoing by Cam or Auburn. But if a kid can get in trouble for his parents talking to an agent or runner about an NFL deal, he should certainly be in trouble for his father talking to an agent or runner about pay for play in college ball.

I'm not saying some sort of rule should be imagined and applied to Cam Newton right this minute. Like I said before, fuck the "spirit of the rule" crowd, and don't just pull a non-existant clause to a rule out of your ass. I'm just saying that they need to fix this to prevent it happening in the future. Obviously the president of the NCAA, commissioner of the SEC, and most of the college football world agrees.

[djsimp]

Like I said before, there are repercussions for a kid attending a party thrown by an agent when he didn't know it was the agent throwing it. There are repercussions for a kid's family talking to an agent about a NFL deal for a kid. Rogers isn't actually an NFLPA certified agent, however, he is a "runner" for one; Ian Greengross, who heads Game Sports and Entertainment. The NCAA doesn't really care if it is an actual agent or runner, for that matter. Why is it those previous two infractions will land your ass in a jam, especially the rule about parents talking to an agent/runner about an NFL deal (even if an agreement isn't made), but your father talking to a runner about pay-for-play at the college level is a-OK?  I agree that there is no evidence of any wrongdoing by Cam or Auburn. But if a kid can get in trouble for his parents talking to an agent or runner about an NFL deal, he should certainly be in trouble for his father talking to an agent or runner about pay for play in college ball.

I'm not saying some sort of rule should be imagined and applied to Cam Newton right this minute. Like I said before, fuck the "spirit of the rule" crowd, and don't just pull a non-existant clause to a rule out of your ass. I'm just saying that they need to fix this to prevent it happening in the future. Obviously the president of the NCAA, commissioner of the SEC, and most of the college football world agrees.

I'm thinking, I mean I heard that the NCAA VP said the same thing about the "loophole" and is also why Cam was ruled eligible.

[RWS]

I'm thinking, I mean I heard that the NCAA VP said the same thing about the "loophole" and is also why Cam was ruled eligible.

And it was the right thing for the NCAA to do, because the current rules don't cover it. The NCAA obviously isn't happy that it happens, and understand that it should be forbidden, but the rules don't cover the scenario. And rightfully, you shouldn't just make a rule up on the fly to cover it. They are doing the right thing by letting him play, and I feel confident that they will do the right thing and fix the loophole for next season.

[djsimp]

And it was the right thing for the NCAA to do, because the current rules don't cover it. The NCAA obviously isn't happy that it happens, and understand that it should be forbidden, but the rules don't cover the scenario. And rightfully, you shouldn't just make a rule up on the fly to cover it. They are doing the right thing by letting him play, and I feel confident that they will do the right thing and fix the loophole for next season.

Well they better or the USC AD might get angry again. We can't have that.