CSS says the SEC passed a Cam Newton rule....

[Dawgzilla]

I don't really know if this is true or not, but the Atlanta Sports Night show that came on the local CSS channel before the Georgia Tech baseball game said the SEC also passed two new rules in response to the Cam Newton mess:

1) A player will be ineligible to play in the SEC if an family member or someone acting on the player's behalf solicits extra benefits; and

2) A member institution will have 30 days to comply with an SEC office request for information regarding a potential violation (that one's directed at MSU).

 

[RonnyAtmosphere]

..the SEC's response to a player asking for, & accepting, a suitcase full of money to play football for Auburn?


It appears the SEC has officially granted Cam & Cecil Newton clemency. These 2 wet noodle rules seem to verify that theory.


The SEC brass are real big idiots if they think these 2 new rules are good enough to wash the stink of corruption off the SEC placed there by conniving mercenaries & corrupt manipulators, Cam & Cecil Newton.

 

[MississippiHeavyMetalDawg]

The SEC created the Cam Newton loophole. Everyone and their brother knows that it was against the rules before Cam and dad broke it. The SEC didn't want to stop their national championship run, so they created a loophole after they were backed in a corner. The SEC administration acted shocked and surprised that a player's parent would ask for money ... then promises SEVERE punishment on the next one to breaks the "new" rule (as long as their name is MSU, Ole Miss, Vandy, Kentucky, or South Carolina). I just hope the NCAA isn't too busy with The Ohio State University and serves some real justiceto Auburn.

 

[FlabLoser]

[No message]

 

[Cousin Jeffrey]

1) A player will be ineligible to play in the SEC if an family member or someone acting on the player's behalf solicits extra benefits; and

The bylaws already stated this:<div>

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...such student-athlete shall be ineligible for competition in any intercollegiate sport within the Conference for the remainder of his/her college career.

</div><div>I'll never understand how that didn't make him ineligible after the SEC acknowledged that Cecil asked for money. But I've never studied law.</div>

 

[dudehead]

I'll never understand how that didn't make him ineligible after the SEC acknowledged that Cecil asked for money. But I've never studied law.

 

[bruiser.sixpack]

1) A player will be ineligible to play in the SEC if an family member or someone acting on the player's behalf solicits extra benefits; and

The bylaws already stated this:
<div>

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...such student-athlete shall be ineligible for competition in any intercollegiate sport within the Conference for the remainder of his/her college career.

</div><div>I'll never understand how that didn't make him ineligible after the SEC acknowledged that Cecil asked for money. But I've never studied law.</div>

 

[SwampDawg]

that this did not apply, as Cecil "asked" for money but technically did not "agree to accept it?" I have the quote in my computer somewhere, and I will try to find it.

 

[MSUFanVburg]

was that they had evidence that Cecil asked money from MSU but there was no evidence that he asked Auburn for money. Now, I think most people can put two and two together to get four but Slive is a lawyer by training and he wanted to see evidence before just assuming. There is no doubt in my mind but that the Newton's were compensated for Cam going to Auburn but if there is no proof then you have the mess we had last year.

 

[MSUFanVburg]

Probably the best thing to happen to Auburn, at least media wise, was that guy poisoning the two trees. The Alabama fans and the mass media have essentially gone quite over Cam since that happened.

 

[Dawgzilla]

All Slive said about the previous bylaw was that it wasn't intended to address situations of this nature, and that it had never been enforced before, and so he didn't think it was appropriate to enforce it when the NCAA had already cleared Cam to play.

If a new bylaw WAS passed, it was essentially the conference agreeing that it would be okay to enforce the provision if a similar situation happens in the future.

That is the one thing that really frustrates me about the Cam Newton case. Both Slive and Emmert seem to say that what Cam did was wrong and ought to result in punishment, but that their hands were tied by the rules. In Emmert's case, he is probably right, since the NCAA rules don't expressly make Cam's actions improper, and you only rule Cam ineligible through pretty broad interpretations of the rules. As Emmert said, he is not like a pro sports league commissioner with absolute authority to do whatever he wants, he has to answer to all of the Presidents. Slive, OTOH, expressly has broad discretion to interpret and enforce all the SEC rules.