If....then

[livinitupzzz 2]

Just confused as to why so many people are confident that IF Cecil looked for money and it didn't go through that it would instantly make Cam  ineligible. If my understanding is correct, There is no hard and fast rule on the issue?  I think that AU is completely aware of what Cecil did or didn't do. It is sad that the son could possibly pay for the sins of his father.

War Eagle!

[MIGMAN 16]

“The solicitation of cash or benefits by a prospective student-athlete or another individual on his or her behalf is not allowed under NCAA rules,” NCAA spokesperson Stacey Osburn told Yahoo! Sports on Thursday.

From what I've read just asking is a violation...whether you get paid or not.

[jsb29 0]

“The solicitation of cash or benefits by a prospective student-athlete or another individual on his or her behalf is not allowed under NCAA rules,” NCAA spokesperson Stacey Osburn told Yahoo! Sports on Thursday.

From what I've read just asking is a violation...whether you get paid or not.

If Cam didn't know, and his dad didn't plan on telling him, or giving him any, is it really "on his behalf"?

[AUbritt 611]

I agree with you, livinit. Someone -- perhaps Slive, can't remember -- today made the distinction between the rule and the interpretation of the rule. I think some folks are interpreting the rule a bit too strictly, especially if there are extenuating circumstances involved (still wondering about the extortion angle).

[aucpe 0]

Someone said in the last couple of days that this is a new twist to the rule within the last year or so.  Is it possible that simple "solicitation of benefits" was NOT in effect when all of this went down?

[AUbritt 611]

Someone said in the last couple of days that this is a new twist to the rule within the last year or so.  Is it possible that simple "solicitation of benefits" was NOT in effect when all of this went down?

Good question. I still would think that extenuating circumstances would have to be considered regardless of the timing, though.

[AUGRAD86 0]

I think that it was added or changed sometime during 2009.

[Rabern57 0]

It would seem like Don Jackson keeps up on the law changes. He said it wasn't illegal to ask. Guess we will have to see.

[aucpe 0]

It would seem like Don Jackson keeps up on the law changes. He said it wasn't illegal to ask. Guess we will have to see.

Tha's what I mean.  I heard him a couple of days ago say that the solictation clause was news to him, and it must have changed recently.

[jsb29 0]

It would seem like Don Jackson keeps up on the law changes. He said it wasn't illegal to ask. Guess we will have to see.

Tha's what I mean.  I heard him a couple of days ago say that the solictation clause was news to him, and it must have changed recently.

He said it wasn't, but the NCAA spokesperson said it was.  Surely the NCAA would make sure it had it's facts and timeline in order before making a statement like that.

[BhamCAT 47]

“The solicitation of cash or benefits by a prospective student-athlete or another individual on his or her behalf is not allowed under NCAA rules,” NCAA spokesperson Stacey Osburn told Yahoo! Sports on Thursday.

From what I've read just asking is a violation...whether you get paid or not.

If Cam didn't know, and his dad didn't plan on telling him, or giving him any, is it really "on his behalf"?

I'm wondering if this isn't the gray area that all parties have been aware of and is why Cam is playing.  If last year I go to Florida and say that for 200K I will get Mark Ingram to transfer there, does that make him ineligible?  I know as a father it's different.......but if there is no connection to Cam knowing then it's really not any different from a legal point.

[WiltonTiger 0]

  Goodnight from the lovely town of Wilton, Al. War Damn Eagle !!!!!! Beat Ga. :wedance:

[AUFan1 0]

I wonder If Don Jackson was on Finebaum for a reason today... Would AU get him on a national show to prep everybody that just because money is asked for it doesn't make the athlete ineligible?

[livinitupzzz 2]

But.... violation does not necesarily equal suspension. Aka secondary violations.

[au03cobrafan 0]

I have not heard proof that Cecil or Cam asked for money.  So all I have to say is shut up about it till there is proof!

[auburn123 0]

Perhaps Slive was conducting peace talks, working his way to resolving the issue so that Auburn wouldn't retaliate toward Mississippi State and the Bulldogs would minimize exposure to Auburn.  Quit leaking, quit talking.  Rev. Newton takes the heat for the deal and Cam plays.  Rev. Newton denies any Mississippi State involvement in the plan.  In this way, he isolates Rogers and possibly Bell from the athletic department at Mississippi State.  Bond has done his best in statements to minimize damage to Auburn.  Mississippi State in return says nothing about the alleged meeting at the Hilton or these possible phone calls, to minimize exposure for Auburn and Mississippi State.  Is Slive good enough to pull that off?