Fascinating (and long) read on corruption at Auburn
November 20th, 2010 at 8:41 AM ^
The level headed and fair Michael Rosenberg will now weigh in on this topic: "What I find remarkable is that, if all of this is true, the under-the-table payments are what would upset people the most. I mean, yes, it is against NCAA rules. But in any other segment of society, if a college kid found a way to use his talents to bring in money to support his father's church, he would be a hero. There would be glowing newspaper profiles and probably a few humanitarian awards. If a kid does it in college football, he's a villain."
Odd how Newton's problems are trivialized...and he can't even remember how many players he interviewed for his Rod-jihad were currently on the team. If this was a UofM player who stole a laptop would it be "win at all costs"?
November 20th, 2010 at 8:54 AM ^
I hate when people write as if churches are paragons of virtue, they can be and are some of the most corrupt places in America, cloaked in self-righteous hypocrisy, run by very corruptable people. If you set up a church, it doesn't mean you ain't greedy, go ask Mr. Newton
November 20th, 2010 at 9:54 AM ^
I think that's true about most organizations; you only hear about the bad ones, because the good ones are quietly being excellent.
November 20th, 2010 at 10:48 AM ^
Corruption, sin, and evil exist in every segment of society and its institutions, including religious ones. Just read the Bible and listen to the scorn Jesus had for the corruption and decay in the religious system. And yes, churches are full of self-righteous hypocrites.
I have several caveats:
- You cannot assume that because one church is corrupt, all are corrupt. This would be like saying because Auburn is corrupt, therefore every NCAA institution is corrupt.
- Sometimes, the situation is pretty complex, and blame isn't always easy to give. The answers to who knew, when did they know, and what did they do are hard to discern.
- Sometimes, the actions of a few individuals can tarnish an entire organization, and somewhat unfairly. Exhibit A: Chris Webber and the Fab Five.
- In one sense, corruption in the church is corruption, no matter how big or small. However, in the same way that Michigan's "major infractions" pale in comparison to what is alleged at Auburn, there is some sense that there are "degrees" of corruption.
- Conspiracy theorists can drive me nuts. They make delightful tales, and great movies, but don't usually hold water.
Regardless, your observations on the church, at least some manifestations of it, can be fair.
November 21st, 2010 at 4:41 PM ^
Exactly, like all human institutions and organizations, the point is that the people in them can practice and preach both good and evil. Look at the fruits they produce, and you will be able to tell the difference between the good and the bad whether they be churches or universities or athletic programs......And how they handle allegations and instances of failure tell you just as much!
November 20th, 2010 at 11:36 AM ^
November 20th, 2010 at 8:49 AM ^
Sorry to be such a homer, but I think it's telling that Auburn is making no moves to investigate themselves or even sit Newton in case he's ineligible. They want that national title, and they'll deal with the consequences later...
Also, thanks to wbdunesman for linking, and again, Rosenberg doesn't get the main point, which is that the problem is with the farce that is NCAA players not getting paid rather than Newton selling himself to the highest bidder - rules are rules...
November 20th, 2010 at 9:37 AM ^
November 20th, 2010 at 9:39 AM ^
The premise that Cam Newton was selling himself to the highest bidder is not really representative of the situation from most accounts. The general sense I get from all of this is that Cam didn't feel like he had a choice. This is not to say that he is not responsible for his choice of going along. He could have told his dad " This is wrong. I want to go to Mississippi State and I don't want you to take any money." Which, by all accounts of the story is what he wanted to do. He wanted to go to State, this much is clear from when he had that "emotional talk" with a player from State( when he said "the money is too much"...or something like that). The fact that Mississippi State said we aren't going to pay you money, and Cam still wanted to go there points me in the direction to believe that either a) Cam didn't know that his Dad was seeking money and/or b) Cam wasn't looking to get paid or c) Cam knew his dad was looking to get paid and was hoping that his dad would still allow him to go to MS, even if they weren't going to pay up.
It seems as though his dad sat down with him and guilt tripped him into going to Auburn. He was losing his church and was financially insolvent. That's a lot of pressure to put on a kid. What was he to do? Of course the right decision, or atleast the one we all assume we would make, would be to turn down the money and follow the rules. Aftetr all, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to look past your nose and know that the big pay day would come in just ONE year-when the NFL would be a possibility. The one Cam made was the wrong one, but from reading things about this story I don't believe Cam put himself in the situation to have to choose the "highest bidder". He had to choose between his honor and his father. Which would you choose?
Now, I do not at all think Cam should get off here and he should be held accountable for his decisions. I feel just as disgusted with his role in all of this as I feel bad for him. In truth I can't blame him and I can't/ nor will I try to prove that he is not guilty as hell. As soon as he decided to go the route his dad wanted him to go, he crossed the line. He should definitely be ruled ineligible for this season, and Auburn should get absolutely demolished in this process. I just wanted to get what I was thinking out. I'm angry that Cam's father did the unthinkable: He sold out his son. Unfathomable.
*Im sure more of the truth will come out about this situation. This is just what I think from the information that is currently available. I reserve the right to change my stance if/when more information becomes available that shows that Cam Newton had a more central role. Thanks.
November 20th, 2010 at 10:53 AM ^
I don't know enough about this yet to comment intelligently. But the scenario you lay out seems plausible. Regardless of whether it is true or not, there are too many situations where outside forces, parents, etc., put unfair and unmanageable pressure on someone who wants to do the right thing in the right way.
November 20th, 2010 at 10:08 AM ^
November 20th, 2010 at 6:30 PM ^
First of all, I question whether SACS will actually remove Auburn's accredidation if these allegations prove true. Doing so would be a political nightmare as it would severely damage a relatively prestigious and longstanding public institution. It seems far more likely that Auburn would be heavily sanctioned by SACS and forced to clean out its Board of Trustees along with many menmbers of its Athletic Department.
Secondly, the SEC itself does not require regional accredidation to join its conference. The NCAA does. One of my problems with this article is that the sources for it don't seem to fully understand the process. In order to be a member of the NCAA, you have to be accreditted by the appropriate agency (it took me about two minutes to find this out). The SEC doesn't have any individual institutional acccredidation rules (I know this because I read the SEC constitution).
November 20th, 2010 at 11:08 AM ^
"Corruption charges?! Corruption?! Corruption is our protection. Corruption keeps us safe and warm. Corruption is why you and I are prancing around in here instead of fighting over [three-stars] out in the street. Corruption is why we win!"