Stop whining: NCAA got it right on Cam Newton, Auburn
Cam Newton can go ahead of celebrate. The NCAA ruled that he and Auburn are in the clear.
Let me start this by declaring that I’m as cynical as the next person — OK, perhaps a little more — and I’m absolutely convinced there was a second gunman in the grassy knoll and there’s something about Area 51 that the government is not telling us.
But listen up: The NCAA got it right.
It could not suspend Cam Newton based on he whispered/he whispered.
It could not place Auburn on probation based on the fact the father of its star player admitted that he solicited money from ANOTHER school.
It could not significantly punish any athlete or institution based on what we all THINK must have happened simply because that’s what our suspicious mind tells us.
This whole saga has been one of the strangest NCAA investigations I can remember, in part because the athlete’s current school (Auburn) never was even connected to the allegations.
I know. Our head tells us: It’s Auburn. It’s the SEC. It’s big-time college football with big-time shenanigans. We’ve been exposed to so much of it in the past that we’ve come to believe that every player, coach, administrator and booster have been have been tainted. This story is even better than most because it involved a father allegedly pimping his kid . . . and he’s a minister!
At some point, you expected a Kardashian to show up on Toomers Corner.
But take a breath and, just for a moment, follow me through the levels of this thing. Then I’ll address why I don’t believe this can be compared to other recent cases, including the one at USC and A.J. Green’s suspension:
♦ Question: Did Cecil Newton, Cam’s father, solicit money from Mississippi State for his son’s services? Answer: Yes. INFRACTION.
♦ Question: Did Cam Newton know his father solicited an offer? Answer: Based on a lack of evidence, no. (If you want to assume otherwise, fine. But let’s just say I’m aware of situations where children did not know of things their parents did. Whether you consider that a longshot or not, the bottom line is that it can’t be proven.)
♦ Question: Did Cecil Newton receive money? Answer: Based on a lack of evidence, no.
♦ Question: Did Cam Newton receive money? Answer: Based on a lack of evidence, no.
♦ Question: Did Cam or Cecil Newton solicit an offer from Auburn? Answer: Based on a lack of evidence, no.
♦ Question: Did Cam or Cecil Newton receive money from Auburn. Answer: Based on a lack of evidence, no.
That’s it. There’s nothing else.
Now, should the NCAA continue to investigate this thing and discover that somebody in the Auburn athletic department or a big-bucks booster slipped a fat envelope under Cam’s door or paid for new floors and sheetrock in Cecil’s new church, then all bets are off.
But that’s not where we are right now.
Now, as for comparing Newton to other cases, I’ve been hearing from USC and Georgia fans all day and night and reading comments on line from various stunned officials, including USC athletic director Pat Haden. But this case is so not those cases. Consider:
♦ Newton vs. USC: Really? Fact: Reggie Bush’s parents received thousands of dollars in benefits from an agent. They lived in a home rent-free for one year. A USC assistant coach, Todd McNair, was tied directly to the case when the NCAA ruled he had knowledge of Bush’s dealings with agents. For whiny Trojan fans to be comparing their case to the Cam Newton case is completely nonsensical.
♦ Newton vs. A.J. Green: Really? Fact: Green sold his Independence Bowl jersey for $1,000. That’s a violation, even if he sold it to you. The fact that he sold to a person that the NCAA classified as an agent increased the suspension to four games. (Best estimate: It would’ve been two games otherwise.) It has not been found that Cam and Cecil Newton received anything (or sold his Blinn Community College jersey).
♦ Newton vs. Damon Stoudamire: This is a very similar case, as laid out by SportsByBrooks, in which the father of the former Arizona basketball star was accused by the NCAA of accepting a plane ticket from an agent in 1995. Stoudamire denied knowing about his father’s alleged transaction. The father denied taking the ticket. The NCAA suspended the player for a game, then reinstated him just before the NCAA tournament. But here’s where the cases go in different directions. The agent in question, Steve Feldman, ultimately admitted he gave airplane tickets to Stoudamire’s father. The father had to reiumburse him. The NCAA believed to other penalty was warranted. Coversely, there is no paper trail or evidence of any kind in the Newton case.
Some believe the NCAA has opened a giant loophole with this ruling — the thinking being that now every dad can go out and pimp his kid to universities, then just claim the kid knew nothing about it. The only problem with that theory is — again — Cecil Newton was not found to have taken anything.
If a father puts his son up for bidding and actually accepts a payment, effectively closing the deal, it really doesn’t matter whether the son knew or not. The athlete is ineligible. It’s like saying you want to rob a bank without ever doing it.
So enough with the NCAA bashing. They got it right. You can’t convict on conjecture.
♦
Recent episodes . . .
♦ Gruden to Miami would be manna for starving ACC
♦ Falcons are winning because they’re following Mike Smith
♦ Surprise! Spurrier proves South Carolina can be a player in SEC
♦ Alabama staffer fired for mocking Cam Newton with songs
♦
Follow me on Twitter @JeffSchultzAJC and Facebook.com/JeffSchultzAJC
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
1,356 comments Add your comment
CrackDaddy
December 1st, 2010
8:38 pm
Cam unaware of Pop’s shenanigans=Butch Davis unaware of John Blake’s
Auburn Fan
December 1st, 2010
8:39 pm
“Considering his cheating and his criminal record”
UGA had 11 players get arrested this year yet dawg fans turn the other cheek.
dawg4life
December 1st, 2010
8:39 pm
Hey, my son will be college bound in 2027, he cuts through the living room with that rattle like Lattimore.
Any collegiate bidders out there?? I am asking 200k…but dont tell him. Sound ethical?? Thought so.
Auburn Fan
December 1st, 2010
8:39 pm
“Auburns SEC title—bought and paid for.”
Where’s your proof of that, Loser?
UGA WOOF WOOF
December 1st, 2010
8:40 pm
WE’Z GOT SCREWED IN 2007 BY LSU!!!!!! WEZ WUS REALLY DA NATIONAL CHAMPIONS!!!!!!
UGA WAS PRESEASON NUMBER ONE IN 2008!!!!!!!! WOOF WOOF SIC EM DAWGS!!!!!!!!!!
jake
December 1st, 2010
8:41 pm
well USC should get their national championship back..and reggie should get his Heisman back…i mean if its good for the goose its good the the gander right?????
UGA fans are dumb as rocks
December 1st, 2010
8:42 pm
jake
There was actual proof in the Reggie Bush case.
The Blair Miss Project
December 1st, 2010
8:42 pm
<———— WIDE LEFT <—————
Why the banishment Jeff??
trupert
December 1st, 2010
8:43 pm
Jeff, I see your points, no direct evidence.
Dad asked for the dollars and he and son say that the son never knew about it? If there was ever a case that the NCAA should continue to investigate it’s this case.
Auburn and Cam may get off scot free but who will ever believe that either would not lie about the truth.
Dawg_Mike
December 1st, 2010
8:43 pm
Kicking 2 players off the team and suspending the rest hardly qualifies as “turn the other cheek”
The Blair Miss Project
December 1st, 2010
8:44 pm
<———— WIDE LEFT <————–
This blog ate 2 of my posts.
Anyway…… who care's about Cam. He is the state of Alabama's problem. This is a state of Georgia paper.
(((((42-34))))) <——– that is what matters!!!
Too Funny
December 1st, 2010
8:46 pm
Jeff, you are one of about 3 other people in the world who are not (excuse me, I forgot you are) Auburn fans who are not flabbergasted by the NCAA ruling. In one ruling, they have gone against their own by-laws and opened a Pandora’s Box that will allow anyone, including family members, friends, agents, runners, etc. to ask for money from any school for any player and get away with it simply by stating that the athlete had no knowledge of it!
The issue here is no longer Cam Newton. The issue is the already shaky integrity of collegiate athletic recruiting and the fact that the NCAA will allow these athletes to be shopped on the open market as long as they claim no knowledge of the pimping.
RAG
December 1st, 2010
8:47 pm
The whole thing is sooo bad for college football and the SEC. I love the sport but the whole ’sell your kid’ and ‘cheat and move on’ mentallity is killing it. There is way too much smoke for there not to be fire. They can win the MNC and celebrate and then give it up later. It will be akin to the Olympian that gets his gold medal in the mail instead of hearing his country’s anthen on the podium. Rules are rules and this really smells. I love watching him play, but this stinks pretty badly. He is stealing again….from all of us.
Cam-A-Lot
December 1st, 2010
8:47 pm
If it doesn’t fit…you must acquit.
Slive said that he received a final set of established facts in the Newton case on Monday of this week. It was only upon receiving these established facts — those facts that were agreed to by both the NCAA and Auburn — that Slive was able to determine whether Newton violated SEC bylaws as well. That decision ultimately came down to Slive’s interpretation of SEC bylaw 14.01.3.2, a bylaw I analyzed two weeks ago for FanHouse. It reads:
“If at any time before or after matriculation in a member institution a student-athlete or any member of his/her family receives or agrees to receive, directly or indirectly, any aid or assistance beyond or in addition to that permitted by the Bylaws of this Conference (except such aid or assistance as such student-athlete may receive from those persons on whom the student is naturally or legally dependent for support), such student-athlete shall be ineligible for competition in any intercollegiate sport within the Conference for the remainder of his/her college career.”
As the individual given specific power in the bylaws to determine what these rules mean, Slive’s decision on whether Newton or his family had received improper benefits boiled down to how he read the above section. Specifically, what did “receives or agrees to receive” mean in the context of a solicitation? In making his decision, Slive, a lawyer and former judge, considered the particular language of the bylaw within the context of three additional forms of authority:
1. The intent of the legislation.
“Based on my research the league’s intent when it added this bylaw was to ensure that if an athlete participated in an NCAA investigation that he wasn’t able to transfer to another institution within our own conference. Essentially to keep one institution from getting into trouble and then have an individual attend another school in the same conference,” Slive said.
Slive continued, “You could read this bylaw expansively to conclude that an athlete is ineligible at all institutions for receiving a hamburger. I did not believe and do not believe that was the intent of the rule.”
2. The legislative history of the bylaw
“The league added that bylaw in 1985,” Slive told me. “That’s a long time ago and since that time it has never been applied by me as commissioner to rule someone ineligible and I don’t believe any of my predecessors have ever applied it to make someone ineligible either. That was significant.”
3. The uniqueness of this case.
“This was a case of first impression,” Slive said. (A case of first impression has no existing precedent). “The SEC had to determine whether it violated SEC bylaws for an individual’s family member to solicit funds from an institution that is different from the one he attended. Ultimately,” Slive said, “I had to determine what the appropriate league response was after balancing all of these factors and after considering all of that I did not believe that he had violated our bylaws.”
As a result, Cam Newton, ruled ineligible Tuesday, is now eligible to play under NCAA rules. With a win in the SEC championship game an undefeated Auburn would advance to Glendale, Ariz., and play for the BCS title.
Asked if he was concerned that the NCAA’s ruling and the SEC’s acquiescence to that ruling without further punishment opened a large loophole in NCAA rules, Slive acknowledged that he was concerned by the precedent set in the Cam Newton case — that family members may solicit benefits from one university while remaining eligible at another. As a result Slive said the SEC would sponsor and send legislation to the NCAA to close the Cam Newton loophole and prevent future instances such as this from occurring. “To the extent that the current legislation is not thorough enough, we are going to work to get national legislation passed to close this loophole,” Slive said.
Nick Fairley hurt me
December 1st, 2010
8:47 pm
Jeff, Finally a reasonable explanation that even uga and uat fans can understand. I know, I found myself laughing at that one too:) Great article!! War Eagle!
UGA fans are dumb as rocks
December 1st, 2010
8:48 pm
Too Funny
Everyone knows that college football is all about making money off of an athlete. If schools can make money selling AJ Green jerseys, AJ Green should be making money himself.
Haters gonna hate
December 1st, 2010
8:49 pm
<———– WIDE LEFT <—————
"If it looks like a pile of poo…… and it smells like a pile of poo…….
It JUST MAY BE a pile of poo"
If it sounds like hoof beats it must be horses…..turns out it was zebras
Maroon Calhoun
December 1st, 2010
8:49 pm
A. Cam Newton wanted to go to MSU, he had every intention of going to MSU, and if we believe him, he would’ve gone to MSU but for Cecil.
B. The reason Cecil made Cam renig on his commitment to MSU was the fact that State didn’t pay the asking price.
C. Cam went to AU because State didn’t pay, whether he was aware that was the reason or not.
D. Whether the act of paying was committed or not, the infraction, I.e. asking for the cash, was committed on behalf of the kid. It is ludicrous to compare this to merely “wanting” to rob a bank. An actual attempt was made to shake down MSU.
E. If the NCAA “got this right” then amateur athletics as we know them are doomed.
UGA fans are dumb as rocks
December 1st, 2010
8:50 pm
Nick Fairley hurt me
Bama fans and UGA fans will never understand because they are too pissed off about losing to Auburn.
“Little Brother” just became top dawg in Alabama.
Braves95WS
December 1st, 2010
8:51 pm
Jeff,
I have to agree with G @ 8:19 pm. “Whatever dude” is the best response you can come up with? Have you gotten what you wanted out of writing this article yet? Typical.
Drifter
December 1st, 2010
8:52 pm
Basically, the NCAA has opened the door for “pay to play”. Just get a parent to handle the money and pretend to know nothing about it. And if they’re going to do that, give Reggie Bush his Heisman back. The NCAA and the sportswriters are basically looking the other way, just like they’ve done on the steroid issue for the past 30 years. Pathetic.
Jeff Schultz
December 1st, 2010
8:52 pm
JK Sockey — He was good . . . when he could still stand up.
Chris
December 1st, 2010
8:52 pm
Jeff, I must disagree 100% on the fact that the “NCAA got it right”. The right thing would have been to do nothing while they did their due diligence.
1. We KNOW Cecil shopped his so!
2. We KNOW Cecil spent the last 2 years finding money to renovate his church.
3. We KNOW that he found financing this year… Around May/June to be exact.
Now, why on earth would the NCAA declare his eligibility now when the truth will not be known for quite some time… and why now when he (or you claim his dad) was in clear violation of one of their rules?
The answer is MONEY… the NCAA doesn’t need a crap mess at the end of the season and once they, the Bowls, the SEC, and etc get their money then they may look back into this.
This is one of the most corrupt items in sports I have ever heard of. It took them to investigate one jersey sell than it has them to investigate this. Also note that they are still investigating at other schools… but this one they can make a decision on?
It would be nice to have a reporter ask the tough questoin…. instead of just trying to disturb the masses…
Mindy
December 1st, 2010
8:53 pm
From BullThe money to Cam’s dad is already suspected to have run through the family’s uncle up north.
Wow you sure got your blogging name right!!! That was the biggest pile of Bull I’ve seen in a while!!!
Flat Earth Society
December 1st, 2010
8:53 pm
dawg4life and the rest of the “Cam Newton is guilty until proven innocent” crowd, there is a meeting tonight of the Flat Earth Society and I would like to invite you all to attend. Your theories involving Cam Newton being bought by Auburn and sold by his father are in complete conjunction with our beliefs regarding the flatness of the Earth.
I know we can all share wonderful ideas and theories. Please visit us at flatearthsocietyorg. Together we can expose both the corruption at Auburn as well as the true nature of the Earth.
Jeff Schultz
December 1st, 2010
8:54 pm
Goodbye Laywering – I’m aware of that. NCAA’s aware of that too. They said infraction was committed. Question is how much you punish for that alone.
Jeff Schultz
December 1st, 2010
8:54 pm
The Blair Miss Project — Actually, it was sixth grade.
Mindy
December 1st, 2010
8:55 pm
2. We KNOW Cecil spent the last 2 years finding money to renovate his church.
3. We KNOW that he found financing this year… Around May/June to be exact.
Question – Exactly how do we “KNOW” all this? Could you maybe point us in the direction of your “source”?
justfootball
December 1st, 2010
8:56 pm
It’s funny how everyone has comments about a player when there are negative comments. I’m sure if the NCAA, SEC or any other division was to investigate every super star player they would probably find something that would make some of thing ineligible. The majority of the comments here are from sore dawg fans who can’t accept they were out played. I don’t agree with half of the NCAA rules on eligibility of players. I think the players should be paid because all of these institutions are making multi millions from the performances of these athletes.
Your FaceBook Friend
December 1st, 2010
8:56 pm
YOU ARE WRONG. Bad precedent to set. This is going be messy.
Jeff Schultz
December 1st, 2010
8:56 pm
CrackDaddy — John Blake was on a football coaching staff. If there’s a violation, doesn’t matter if Butch Davis knew or not.
to the nobody at 8:30 pm
December 1st, 2010
8:57 pm
What rules did Auburn break exactly? Why does Auburn get an asterisk?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm?
Jeff Schultz
December 1st, 2010
8:57 pm
Blair Miss Project — Don’t know why your comments keep ending up in spam. But I’ve RELEASED THE HOUNDS!
Jeff Schultz
December 1st, 2010
8:58 pm
Too Funny — Only 3? Really. Because I talked to people on the phone tonight who agree with me and one works for a major university. So I guess there’s nobody else in the world except us three. Cool.
georgia87
December 1st, 2010
8:59 pm
What I have missed is any explanation of why he was reinstated. He was ruled ineligible. There was a violation. Is the only reason that he was reinstated the fact that he was apparently unaware? If so, where is that in the NCAA bylaws? Otherwise, conspiracy theories stick. That’s the reason that you believe in the grassy knoll shooter…back and to the left. Without an explanation, we have to assume it is about the money.
Jeff Schultz
December 1st, 2010
8:59 pm
Nick Fairley Hurt Me — Thanks, bud.
Chris at 8:52 pm
December 1st, 2010
8:59 pm
Have you SEEN the church? Still closed down and boarded up?
Drive by there, son. It’s right down the road and not hard to see that it’s not exactly “fixed up”
Enjoy that KoolAid!
Follow the money...
December 1st, 2010
9:00 pm
Good job, Jeff! I know is much more sensational and, at times, more fun to indulge the conspiracy theory, but thank you for being more concerning with getting it right. Thank you for being a journalist.
DavidAM
December 1st, 2010
9:00 pm
Two parts of this I can’t quite make sense of. If a solicitation was made, then we have to assume that the offer was declined, which led to the selection of Auburn by the father. A violation occurred. With or without any exchange of payment, wasn’t the selection of Auburn in some way affected by the violation? Shouldn’t that be punished? The second part I do not get – if Cam was suspended for acts that occurred a year ago, shouldn’t that have an effect on his eligibility for the earlier games this season?
Sad for the Dawgs
December 1st, 2010
9:00 pm
UGA wanted SO badly for Cam and Auburn to go down.
UGA thought that in some way they’d be avenged for a loss on the football field.
This has got to be killing the pups.
Too bad — so sad.
Jeff Schultz
December 1st, 2010
9:01 pm
Braves95WS — I thought about, “You’re a moron” as comeback, but I’m trying to be nice to morons. Wait, that didn’t come out right. … Anyway, so I went with standard, “Whatever, dude,” thinking it would leave him/her . . . perplexed. Yeah, that’s it. Perplexed.
L-Dawg
December 1st, 2010
9:01 pm
“It depends on what the definition of is, is”
- Mike Slive
Jeff Schultz
December 1st, 2010
9:01 pm
Chris — Try that in a court of law without evidence, and then get back to me.
AUMan
December 1st, 2010
9:02 pm
Here is a question for all of you guys and ladies. How do you think Albert Means was still eligible to transfer from Bama and play at a D1 school (Memphis) when several hundred thousand dollars actually did change hands and there was a money trail? Bama went on probation and nothing happened to Memphis and he was eligible to play there.
No money or anything of value has even been shown to have changed hands in the Newton case, so by comparing to the Means case where money actually changed hands, why in the heck do you think Newton would be ineligible at Auburn when Auburn has not been accused of anything?
Just saying
Finally!!!
December 1st, 2010
9:02 pm
Some responsible journalism!!!
Thank you, thank you, Jeff!
You’re taking a stand for the truth, which is not always the popular thing to do.
My faith in sportswriters just might be restored yet!!!
Ralph
December 1st, 2010
9:03 pm
But the AJC (until this column today) didn’t get it right for the dozens of columns and articles inferring Cam Newton guilt, ineligibility, and forfeited games. “Reporting” rumor, innuendo, wishful thinking, and rampant speculation just added to the AJC’s reputation as a political rag.
Edawg71
December 1st, 2010
9:03 pm
Anyone honestly believe this thing is actually over? This is only Round 1. It’s not over.
AUMan
December 1st, 2010
9:03 pm
I forgot to add that Miss St is the one being investigated for the wrongdoing, not Auburn, much like Bama was in the Means case, not Memphis.
Jeff Schultz
December 1st, 2010
9:04 pm
Georgia87 — That part of story is strange. Effectively, NCAA suspended Cam Newton for one day — Tuesday — for the admitted violation of the father soliciting money. Of course, that suspension never was announced publicly.
AU Engineer
December 1st, 2010
9:04 pm
Schultz: This was an excellent and succinct article. Although the Cam story generated a lot of heat/light/sound, the story was never really that complex – - as your 6 questions so cogently establish.
Auburn was concerned, of course, but I don’t think ever really worried. Coach Chiz was not going to knowingly risk surrendering $1.4 million (the penalty clause in his AU contract for a SINGLE NCAA infraction) last July when he had 3 quality QBs on the roster in addition to Cam. AU played Cam because they did not see a violation. Period.
Auburn’s compliance official is a former NCAA attorney for crying out loud!
Now, we do have some REAL problems looming with an excellent USCe team.