Cecil Newton clarification

[Bro Johnny Mac 1,412]

Id be willing to guess that this isnt the last article from Winnie on this subject,stay tuned.

[macus23 24]

Cecil's lawyer may use the biased reports to show that there was malicious intent (smear campaign).

There are others on this board that are better versed in the legal ramifications.  I would like to hear their opinion.

[tigerrules 517]

He was only provided very specific information and quotes.  For a reason.  Macus23,  we are on the same page.  Things got out of hand last week, thanks to the turds and gators.  Late in the week higher powers had to intervene.  Remember the infamous post from Mayor on the "PTB".  Vern even stated in the broadcast on Saturday that Auburn may have information that the rest of us do not know.  Media has basically stopped. Everyone is in lockdown.  Things like that don't just happen on their own.  I have a feeling that those that leaked may potentially face obstruction charges.  And if someone actually leaked Cam's info from Florida, they better find a rock to crawl under.

[Auhsv 0]

Since so many reporters were saying his report was Cecil admitted asking for money, I asked him if his report meant to say Cecil asked for money or was his report accurate. He told me he didnt' recall reporting Cecil asked for anything and said I was a discerning viewer.  I took that to mean since he didnt' say Cecil asked for anything, Cecil didn't (at least according to his source).

[Bro Johnny Mac 1,412]

Since so many reporters were saying his report was Cecil admitted asking for money, I asked him if his report meant to say Cecil asked for money or was his report accurate. He told me he didnt' recall reporting Cecil asked for anything and said I was a discerning viewer.  I took that to mean since he didnt' say Cecil asked for anything, Cecil didn't (at least according to his source).

??? You talked with Winnie?

[Auhsv 0]

No, sorry. email

[Bro Johnny Mac 1,412]

No, sorry. email

Got ya.You and Marcus23 are getting some good info,I wonder why the press hasnt talked with Winnie :-\

[macus23 24]

No, sorry. email

Got ya.You and Marcus23 are getting some good info,I wonder why the press hasnt talked with Winnie :-\

They (the press) will be asking themselves this same question later on.  If not, someone behind a desk will.

[Auhsv 0]

Johnny Mac, the reason nobody is talking about it is it doesn't fit the conclusions so many have already made.

[AUBuilderman 0]

So why doesn't he just clarify it? I'm tired of the double speak and code words.

I think the exact quote may have been drafted with the "source" and he was asked to only convey that.  This way the source felt comfortable that he wouldn't add information or missinterpretation to the statement.  Unfortunately it may have backfired on the source because the media that wants to call him guilty are reading what they want to into the quote. 

[ChuckTownTiger 0]

So why doesn't he just clarify it? I'm tired of the double speak and code words.

I think the exact quote may have been drafted with the "source" and he was asked to only convey that.  This way the source felt comfortable that he wouldn't add information or missinterpretation to the statement.  Unfortunately it may have backfired on the source because the media that wants to call him guilty are reading what they want to into the quote. 

^^^This was kind of alluded to in the Finebaum interview.

[AUnCullman 601]

One thing that whiney did say is that his editor was close to alabama. That explains alot as well as to why this was even written and probably why he cannot talk much about it.

[rockfordpi 91]

One thing that whiney did say is that his editor was close to alabama. That explains alot as well as to why this was even written and probably why he cannot talk much about it.

I do not at all understand this post. Is this implying BAMA is somehow behind this release.

From what I heard, he was going to great lengths to protect his source, as would any good journalist, else you will have no source.

[AUFan1 0]

I've been thinking about this whole situation and what do we really know...... I can accept the fact that something wasn't on the up and up in MSU recruitment of Cam Newton..... What I and most AU fans can't/ won't accept is that because of that we are guilty and we are the school the NCAA is gonna hammer.. The only link between AU and MSU is Cam Newton....

I find the use of the Albert Means case invalid too.... First off there was evidence in that case that 4 other schools were bidding on him. In this case the only school that is known to have possibly discussed money is MSU.. Secondly, whether Bammer knew about Means being bought or not, it was ultimately a bammer booster who was found guilty of paying the money....In this case we have at least 3 known MSU alumni/boosters as well as 2 possibly more coaches in discussions about money. To this point no alumni/booster from any other school that recruited Cam has been found to have even entertained the idea of money. Finally bammer was ultimately hammered because they were the school that won the bidding war for Albert. He was a bammer player.... There has been no evidence of a bidding war for Cam. He ended up at AU, but to this point no one has seen any evidence of wrong doing by our staff, alumni or boosters.

So the conclusion the talking heads are drawing is there is plenty of circumstantial evidence that MSU was up to no good, but because Cam plays at AU we are gonna be or should be the school that pays the ultimate price. If there is zero evidence linking AU to any shady recruiting, it would be unprecedented for the NCAA to punish AU for the sins of another program. I have never heard of the NCAA forcing a member institution to vacate wins for the recruiting violations of another school, but if you follow their logic that is what they are saying should happen or is gonna happen....

That is why the NCAA statute reads like it does regarding improper benefits. That's why it says the athlete shall be deemed ineligible at THAT school and not all schools. That's why AU feels so confident that Cam is eligible to play at AU. If you tried to apply that statute in the way the media wants it to read, I could literally walk up to any player bammer is recruiting, say I was with another school and offer them a $1000 dollars, and automatically make that player ineligible.

[rockfordpi 91]

I've been thinking about this whole situation and what do we really know...... I can accept the fact that something wasn't on the up and up in MSU recruitment of Cam Newton..... What I and most AU fans can't/ won't accept is that because of that we are guilty and we are the school the NCAA is gonna hammer.. The only link between AU and MSU is Cam Newton....

I find the use of the Albert Means case invalid too.... First off there was evidence in that case that 4 other schools were bidding on him. In this case the only school that is known to have possibly discussed money is MSU.. Secondly, whether Bammer knew about Means being bought or not, it was ultimately a bammer booster who was found guilty of paying the money....In this case we have at least 3 known MSU alumni/boosters as well as 2 possibly more coaches in discussions about money. To this point no alumni/booster from any other school that recruited Cam has been found to have even entertained the idea of money. Finally bammer was ultimately hammered because they were the school that won the bidding war for Albert. He was a bammer player.... There has been no evidence of a bidding war for Cam. He ended up at AU, but to this point no one has seen any evidence of wrong doing by our staff, alumni or boosters.

So the conclusion the talking heads are drawing is there is plenty of circumstantial evidence that MSU was up to no good, but because Cam plays at AU we are gonna be or should be the school that pays the ultimate price. If there is zero evidence linking AU to any shady recruiting, it would be unprecedented for the NCAA to punish AU for the sins of another program. I have never heard of the NCAA forcing a member institution to vacate wins for the recruiting violations of another school, but if you follow their logic that is what they are saying should happen or is gonna happen....

That is why the NCAA statute reads like it does regarding improper benefits. That's why it says the athlete shall be deemed ineligible at THAT school and not all schools. That's why AU feels so confident that Cam is eligible to play at AU. If you tried to apply that statute in the way the media wants it to read, I could literally walk up to any player bammer is recruiting, say I was with another school and offer them a $1000 dollars, and automatically make that player ineligible.

A very well reasoned post. The only thing I would add is that Albert Means WAS ELIGIBLE to and did play at Memphis State

[AUFan1 0]

I've been thinking about this whole situation and what do we really know...... I can accept the fact that something wasn't on the up and up in MSU recruitment of Cam Newton..... What I and most AU fans can't/ won't accept is that because of that we are guilty and we are the school the NCAA is gonna hammer.. The only link between AU and MSU is Cam Newton....

I find the use of the Albert Means case invalid too.... First off there was evidence in that case that 4 other schools were bidding on him. In this case the only school that is known to have possibly discussed money is MSU.. Secondly, whether Bammer knew about Means being bought or not, it was ultimately a bammer booster who was found guilty of paying the money....In this case we have at least 3 known MSU alumni/boosters as well as 2 possibly more coaches in discussions about money. To this point no alumni/booster from any other school that recruited Cam has been found to have even entertained the idea of money. Finally bammer was ultimately hammered because they were the school that won the bidding war for Albert. He was a bammer player.... There has been no evidence of a bidding war for Cam. He ended up at AU, but to this point no one has seen any evidence of wrong doing by our staff, alumni or boosters.

So the conclusion the talking heads are drawing is there is plenty of circumstantial evidence that MSU was up to no good, but because Cam plays at AU we are gonna be or should be the school that pays the ultimate price. If there is zero evidence linking AU to any shady recruiting, it would be unprecedented for the NCAA to punish AU for the sins of another program. I have never heard of the NCAA forcing a member institution to vacate wins for the recruiting violations of another school, but if you follow their logic that is what they are saying should happen or is gonna happen....

That is why the NCAA statute reads like it does regarding improper benefits. That's why it says the athlete shall be deemed ineligible at THAT school and not all schools. That's why AU feels so confident that Cam is eligible to play at AU. If you tried to apply that statute in the way the media wants it to read, I could literally walk up to any player bammer is recruiting, say I was with another school and offer them a $1000 dollars, and automatically make that player ineligible.

A very well reasoned post. The only thing I would add is that Albert Means WAS ELIGIBLE to and did play at Memphis State

Right, because he didn't know he was being shopped, and......... Memphis was not implicated in being in a bidding war for him.... He was as the statute reads ineligible at That(bammer) institution..

[AUFan1 0]

I also think the statute reads like that for another reason..... future earnings.... The NCAA isn't dumb, they know a lot of athletes future earnings are going to be primarily through professional football...

Scenario: Super stud 5 star recruit is offered money or a family member solicits money from a school recruiting him. NCAA opens an investigation and finds a violation... Are they going to deem him ineligible at ALL schools, and there by take away his chances at an NFL career? No way.... Now they may deem him ineligible at that school, but providing he didn't know they would probably let him transfer (hello Albert Means).. Even if he was guilty, the NCAA still allows for the player to repay the value of the improper benefits, and then allows for reinstatement. (Hello Marcel Darius)... I guess my point is even with improper benefits, the NCAA rarely makes a player permanently ineligible, except for maybe when they sign with an agent. In most cases though there is a process for the player to be reinstated... 

[Bro Johnny Mac 1,412]

In the albert Means case,folks got paid,NO money has been exchanged in this case.

[AUFan1 0]

In the albert Means case,folks got paid,NO money has been exchanged in this case.

Right. As much as people want to make the Means case and the Newton case out to be similar, they aren't... The NCAA is simply not going to punish AU for the recruiting violations of MSU.... They can only punish AU for any violations they commit, and of course they have found zero..

[ChuckTownTiger 0]

I think MSU may be the one to get some sort of slap on the wrist because of their shotty paperwork.  If they would have gotten all the information in when the SEC asked for it.  This whole mess may have been avoided.