OT - Newton article on Yahoo Sports

Submitted by bighouseinmate on December 1st, 2010 at 8:24 PM

Has anyone else read the Newton article on Yahoo! Sports by Dan Wetzel?

It discusses an interesting result of the NCAA ruling on Newton's re-instatement of eligibility. Basically, the future is cleared for third-party "go-betweens", non-agent "agents", and even the parents for asking a school for compensation in return for their son's(or even daughter's, in the bigger women's sports) acceptance to play for them with no fear of any lasting repercussions to the player, team, or even the person doing the "asking".

There is also an interesting poll there. Right now, the leading vote getter is that Newton should be suspended for the entire season(at 77%), second is no penalties(17%), third is suspension from SECCG(5%), and last is suspension for a half of the SECCG(1%). My question would be just who are the 17% that agree that no action should be taken against him?

Comments

bighouseinmate

December 1st, 2010 at 8:32 PM ^

.....then I realized that Auburn takes a backseat to Alabama in their own state, and many schools like us, USC, tOSU and some others have tons of fans spread across the country.

My guess is that the SEC fans are banding together(all but the South Carolina fans) to protect their "domination" in the MNC game.

phills39

December 1st, 2010 at 8:36 PM ^

17% of voters were Auburn fans, 5% of voters SC State and Bama fans, 1% of voters were Newton's family, and 77% of voters were everyone else.  I don't think you can get any more analytical than that.

Please note that this is false data.

Dnldk3

December 1st, 2010 at 8:36 PM ^

If the NCAA seriousy believes Cam Newton didn't know what his dad was doing everyone on the cimmittee needs to be replaced. There is no way that he didn't know, Cam Newton is a disgrace to college football and if he wins the Heisman I will have lost faith in the Heisman complteley.

bighouseinmate

December 1st, 2010 at 8:45 PM ^

Myles Brand was President of the NCAA for nearly seven years. He died late last year, but I believe a sizable number of his hires are still with the NCAA. It is no wonder they would make such an idiotic decision like this.

Brand is most famous for firing the greatest basketball coach in Indiana, and arguably the B10's, history. Indiana has been dogsh*t since Knight was fired.

bighouseinmate

December 1st, 2010 at 9:21 PM ^

He had a .730% overall winning percentage, won 70% of his B10 games, won 11 conference championships, won 3 NCAA titles, numerous other final four, elite eight and sweet sixteen appearances, made the NCAA tourney his last 15 years in a row at IU. Yeah, so they were only winning at a 66.7% clip over his last decade or so, but they still were making the tourney, still getting really good recruits, and his team was on the verge of being tops not only in the B10, but also the country. Not exactly warm dog poo, as you stated.

He was, and still is, highly regarded by IU basketball fans, and the incident that led to his firing was blown well out of proportion, but didn't even involve an actual player, but just a student.

"Zero tolerance", especially directed at one particular person, is an asinine way of doing business anywhere. Nearly all the IU fans that I know(I live in TerreHaute, IN) believe that Knight got shafted by a man bent on his own ego-trip in placing academics above any and all athletics, regardless of the amount of money a sport brought to the university.

CWoodson

December 1st, 2010 at 10:02 PM ^

And what's more, Sean May was coming in his next recruiting class 100%.  Indiana was about to be back, a truly mediocre coach took Knight's players to a Final Four (which I'm willing to bet Knight might have won, considering his ability), and Brand was a horse's ass then and throughout his career.

davidhm

December 1st, 2010 at 11:37 PM ^

I grew up in Indiana and was a huge Knight fan (still am, actually) but he was also known for his First Round flame outs in the NCAA.  Never failed.  During his last few years at IU, and even at Texas Tech, he'd get a team in the Tourney and then under perform.  Yes, he was great in the heyday, but towards the end he would win the Big Ten but under perform in the tournament.  Kinda like a football coach we all knew and loved.  Tons of Big Ten Championships, not a lot of anything else. 

EDIT: I can see why Brand fired him, but it set the IU BBall program back by more than a decade.  Hell, they still haven't recovered. (No thanks to Sampson) Not only that, it caused a major divide within the fan base.  Again, another similarity to our beloved UofM as of late.

lilpenny1316

December 3rd, 2010 at 11:27 AM ^

His overall stats are nice, but they became "one-and-done" from the mid-90s until he was fired.  That helps you lose some of your luster, even for a legendary coach.  They became average during his later years there, which is good to finish in the upper half of the conference and get a tourney berth.

And the zero tolerance was more of a shot to MSU and their "zero tolerance" policy.  Knight may have been shafted and did not get much of a chance to give his side of the story.  But fact remains that he still rubbed a lot of people the wrong way and needs to stay away from any conflicts, regardless of how minor they are.

michiganfanforlife

December 2nd, 2010 at 9:33 AM ^

I forget his name,  but there was a reporter who hated Bobby's guts for years. His son went to IU, and they set Coach up. Everyone who knows Bobby knows he is all about respect and especially respecting your elders. You don't address an older person by their first name, or a nickname - you adress them as mister, or sir, or something cordial/respectful.

Knowing his hatred of disrespectful kids, they had the son of this reporter (I wish I remembered both of their names) walk up to Bobby after a practice outside the facility and say "Wassup Bobby?"  - In typical Bobby Knight fashion, he grabbed the kids shoulder and said, "that's mister Knight to you, son." And that was what got him fired.

Now I'm not gonna say that he didn't do crazy things that coaches today would get away with. I remeber the choking incident, and there are all kinds of stories about showing his feces to the team at halftime to illustrate how they were playing. There are hundreds of them. I met him several times at his basketball camp growing up, and he is an amazing person.

Great coaches have a way of getting the most out of people. They push you past your own potential by finding ways to motivate you beyond your own comprehension. Does this excuse radical behavior? No. But think back to all the greatest coaches of our time. They were all a little crazy, passionate, intelligent, great motivators, and people you would let watch your kids.

Waters Demos

December 1st, 2010 at 9:02 PM ^

Well, but there's a standard of proof that they must meet.  If that standard has not been met, then they should not act.

I think you're oversimplifying here.  What do they have - text messages?  Hearsay evidence?  Maybe there's more that I'm not aware of. 

However, I do agree with you to the extent that you have concern about so-called "amateurism" in college athletics.  My sentiment is to come down very hard on these people. 

UMaD

December 1st, 2010 at 8:54 PM ^

There is no proof that Cam Newton did anything wrong.  There is no proof that Auburn did anything wrong.  I don't see what the NCAA can do here that would be fair.

Innocent until proven guilty is a concept I support because I'm an American.

dennisblundon

December 1st, 2010 at 8:59 PM ^

Hey there Rick Stanzi. Innocent until proven guilty I am all for but our legal system as well as the NCAA move so slowly that there will be no consequences until long after Cam Newton has left Auburn. I am all for him getting a fair shake as long as this is reviewed prior to their bowl game. Don't think the SEC will let this happen for one minute as BCS dollars are at stake.

bighouseinmate

December 1st, 2010 at 9:35 PM ^

All signs point to something seriously wrong with the situation.

Was it fair to Vince Young , Leinhart or Brady Quinn that Bush initially won the Heisman, only to have to give it up years later?

Was it fair to PSU, tOSU or Georgia that USC was able to play in the MNC ahead of them, only to have USC be forced to vacate it's wins for all of that season?

Was it fair to Auburn or Texas when USC went to the MNC for the 04-05 season, only to have USC be forced to vacate it's last two wins of that season because of Bush?

Now, think about this year. If, in the near future, it is determined that Newton received improper benefits from Auburn, will it be fair to the rest of the Heisman finalists(assuming he wins it), or will it be fair to TCU or Wisky if Auburn plays in the MNC? Not hardly, and what the NCAA has done is to invite further improper benefits to take place in a more "open" atmosphere, as long as the player himself "knows nothing about it".

UMaD

December 1st, 2010 at 10:43 PM ^

maybe

but no hard evidence

The court of public opinion is often wrong.  Its more important that justice be served and innocent people aren't presumed to be guilty then we rush to judgement..

The answer to all your "is it fair" questions is no.  The answer to "Is it fair if Newton is punished without any proof of culpability on his part?" is also no.

dennisblundon

December 1st, 2010 at 8:54 PM ^

So on Christmas Day,when Cam's dad tosses him the keys to his new car, everything is cool because hey this is just magical money that bought this gift. The lord and Auburn do work in mysterious ways I guess.

I guess I am just jealous I guess because Cam's dad is so much better than my own. My dad always made me own up to my mistakes and do what was right and his dad brokered a deal for them for a boat load of cash, then took the wrap for it. Thanks for nothin' dad!

tmurda1234

December 1st, 2010 at 8:55 PM ^

Cam Newton definitely knew what his father was doing.  The inference there is so strong, it's absurd that the NCAA ignored it.

I guess it is in the NCAA's best interest to avoid having the (arguably) best player be brought down on charges.  I don't know, whatever it is, it's dirty bid-nass.

Can a brother get a Fuck Cam Newton?

turd sandwich

December 1st, 2010 at 9:01 PM ^

I don't understand how this...

The NCAA released its finding in a statement Wednesday. The college sports governing body had concluded on Monday that a violation of Newton's amateur status had occurred.

...can be in the same findings statement as this...

"Based on the information available to the reinstatement staff at this time, we do not have sufficient evidence that Cam Newton or anyone from Auburn was aware of this activity"

me

December 1st, 2010 at 10:15 PM ^

Oh hell yeah.  But the NCAA does not have that evidence....yet.  But, on the other hand, that doesn't mean Auburn knew that he asked any other school for money.  Should they have suspected?  Probably, but that's a couple steps to get there.  So based just on what evidence the NCAA had, I don't think it's a logical flaw in what they decided.

So yeah, I guess I can write it with a straight face.

CWoodson

December 1st, 2010 at 10:28 PM ^

If it's about smoking gun evidence, no, the NCAA doesn't have it.  But the leaps in logic it takes to get from "Attempts to shake down school A for a massive sum, and we have evidence" to "Goes to school B without a shred of impropriety after telling school A 'the money was too much'" are massive.

A non-criminal jury, based on the circumstantial evidence alone, would probably find that it was more likely than not he got money from Auburn.  It may well be good that the NCAA uses a "beyond a reasonable doubt" vs. a "preponderance of the evidence" standard, but the result here is that a filthy program and player go unpunished.

me

December 1st, 2010 at 10:44 PM ^

this investigation is not over, per the NCAA.  This is essentially a preliminary ruling based on nothing more than the MSU stuff.  Auburn and Cam are far from in the clear on this

 

 

edit:  And damn it to myself.  I'm really not trying to defend the NCAA.  I know they suck and ultimately if Auburn gets off on this deal, I will be pissed because I have little doubt they're hands are dirty.   Just wanted to make that clear.

bronxblue

December 1st, 2010 at 9:06 PM ^

I said it in an earlier thread, but the NCAA would rather cash in on the ratings bonanza that is a Cam Newton-led MNC game now and simply strip him and Auburn of their wins later than deal with the reality now.  From a business sense I don't blame them at all, but then again I thought their job was to uphold amateur athletics.  Good to see they have their priorities in order.