NCAA rules Cam Newton eligible

[Riddickulous]

NCAA rules Cam Newton eligible to play - SEC Blog - ESPN

Huh.

 

[military_irish]

well the flood gates will be opened now, just pay the parents with out the kids "knowledge". And the kid will play where ever the parents push them to play.

Say goodbye to college football as we know it

 

[Cali_domer]

Yeah, this is a bad precedent. The Condoms must be pissed.

 

[IrishLax]

This is an utter failure by the NCAA. I need to start a sports blog so I can spew common sense. Even if no one reads it it will at least be cathartic.

 

[IrishinSyria]

This isn't the final word. This is just them sweeping it all under the rug until after the season.

As things stand, though, this is complete bull ****. As M.I. said, this has the potential to end amateurism as we know it. Either embrace the concept or don't, don't say it's ok for a parent to go fishing for cash as long as the player doesn't know (wink wink) about it.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

well the flood gates will be opened now, just pay the parents with out the kids "knowledge". And the kid will play where ever the parents push them to play.

Say goodbye to college football as we know it

I disagree. A cornerstone of him being eligible is the fact that Auburn neither paid anything nor knew about his dad's potential demands. School payments are still illegal.

If the school's innocent, and the player's innocent, then can anyone really complain about the player being allowed to play for the school?

 

[IrishinSyria]

If the school's innocent, and the player's innocent, then can anyone really complain about the player being allowed to play for the school?

Yes.

The act of requesting payment is enough to render a player ineligible. Whether Newton did it or his father did should not be relevant. Otherwise, you'd be crazy to not ask schools for money. Dad asks school A for money. If school A says yes, attend school A and hide money. If school A says no, ask school B for money. Rinse and repeat. School A can turn you in, but all they will have evidence of is the father asking for money, not the actual transfer of money (since they refused).

 

[irishff1014]

This will be a big issue when the season is over. If not then all the big star recuirts will start doing this so the parents can get money and teams get good players.

 

[military_irish]

They were talking about the actual rule on ESPN radio, if ANYONE ask money from ANYONE associated with a school or agency it renders the athlete automatically ineligible

 

[Irish Houstonian]

They were talking about the actual rule on ESPN radio, if ANYONE ask money from ANYONE associated with a school or agency it renders the athlete automatically ineligible

You can read the rule yourself a number of places -- the player has to have knowledge of it and/or authorize someone asking for money on their behalf. That's what hasn't been shown. If you ask for money from Auburn, for example, it doesn't render Cam ineligible any more than me asking.

Obviously we don't know the whole story, just what's been proven to the satisfaction of the NCAA.

 

[military_irish]

Ok so once I got a chance to do some research this is what I found. It's the best part that shows why he should be ineligible, and from everything in that section and others, I personally seen nothing that says the athlete has to have knowledge it was happening.

12.3.1.2 Benefits from Prospective Agents. An individual shall be ineligible per Bylaw 12.3.1 if he or she
(or his or her relatives or friends) accepts transportation or other benefits from: (Revised: 1/14/97)
(a) Any person who represents any individual in the marketing of his or her athletics ability. The receipt of
such expenses constitutes compensation based on athletics skill and is an extra benefit not available to the
student body in general; or
(b) An agent, even if the agent has indicated that he or she has no interest in representing the student-athlete
in the marketing of his or her athletics ability or reputation and does not represent individuals in the
student-athlete’s sport. (Adopted: 1/14/97)

 

[Irish Houstonian]

Ok so once I got a chance to do some research this is what I found. It's the best part that shows why he should be ineligible, and from everything in that section and others, I personally seen nothing that says the athlete has to have knowledge it was happening.

You're quoting the benefits section -- none of Newton's family members received anything of value. This is the USC golf-cart rule.

 

[military_irish]

The reason Cam was originally ruled ineligible yesterday, but wasn't reported, was because it was found that his father had in fact asked for money from an agency to have his son, Cam Newton, play for Miss. St. Which in that case would fall under the benefits section.

The reason the NCAA then overturned that ruling was because they look at each case on an individual basis. For whatever reason, it was then ruled that he could play because they felt Cam had no "knowledge", but if the rule is read correctly, he should be still be ineligible. The rule itself states nothing about knowledge, it was the NCAA that decided that, because it each case is looked at on an individual basis.

 

[TDHeysus]

....Whether Newton did it or his father did should not be relevant. Otherwise, you'd be crazy to not ask schools for money. Dad asks school A for money. If school A says yes, attend school A and hide money. If school A says no, ask school B for money. Rinse and repeat. School A can turn you in, but all they will have evidence of is the father asking for money, not the actual transfer of money (since they refused).

^^this is what the NCAA is endorsing by making this ruling.

If your a parent/guardian - from a business point of view, it doesnt make sense to NOT shop around. just claim that your child doesnt know about it, and keep asking for $$$$ until you get a school that pays. if you dont find a school that pays, you still havent lost anything. So, why not shop around?? your wont lose, or risk anything by doing so.

what a horrible ruling by the NCAA, even if this was to 'sweep it under the rug till a later date'.

 

[aubeirish]

NCAA is getting soft. I hope they don't overrule USC's appeal.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

The reason Cam was originally ruled ineligible yesterday, but wasn't reported, was because it was found that his father had in fact asked for money from an agency to have his son, Cam Newton, play for Miss. St. Which in that case would fall under the benefits section.

The reason the NCAA then overturned that ruling was because they look at each case on an individual basis. For whatever reason, it was then ruled that he could play because they felt Cam had no "knowledge", but if the rule is read correctly, he should be still be ineligible. The rule itself states nothing about knowledge, it was the NCAA that decided that, because it each case is looked at on an individual basis.

Under Bylaw 12 only a "representative" asking for money can make a player ineligible. If a player has no knowledge of another asking for money on his behalf, then by definition that person is not a "representative".

In fact, if Cam could truly show that he had no knowledge of the request (assuming the request happened...) he would have a pretty good 14th Amendment Due Process claim against the NCAA, were he ruled ineligible. This would be a helluva lot stronger than Clarett's Sherman Act claim that made it all the way to the federal circuit court of appeals.

 

[IrishinSyria]

Under Bylaw 12 only a "representative" asking for money can make a player ineligible. If a player has no knowledge of another asking for money on his behalf, then by definition that person is not a "representative".

In fact, if Cam could truly show that he had no knowledge of the request (assuming the request happened...) he would have a pretty good 14th Amendment Due Process claim against the NCAA, were he ruled ineligible. This would be a helluva lot stronger than Clarett's Sherman Act claim that made it all the way to the federal circuit court of appeals.

So, assuming it's clear that his father did attempt to secure financial reward from at least one school, the question becomes: is his father a "representative" of Cam Newton. The clause Military Irish cites implies that, yes, he is a representative of Cam.

There's no way to prove that Cam didn't have knowledge of his father's request. In fact, his quote that "the money was too good" strongly implies that he was well aware of what was going on. There's also no evidence that Newton had a falling out with his father and that his father may have been trying to sabotage his eligibility. Finally, if his father wasn't a representative of Newton, his actions make no sense. How could he promise his son to a school in return for cash if his actions had no effect on his son's decision?

If you're right, this is the mother of all loopholes and every single parent, friend, or coach of a 5 star athlete has a financial obligation to start demanding money from schools.

 

[Legacy]

Hi, we're the Enforcement Staff and rule that your son/QB is ineligible. I see you brought your lawyers.

Step next door and the Reinstatement Staff will grant your request.

Have a nice day.

NCAA

 

[military_irish]

Under Bylaw 12 only a "representative" asking for money can make a player ineligible. If a player has no knowledge of another asking for money on his behalf, then by definition that person is not a "representative".

In fact, if Cam could truly show that he had no knowledge of the request (assuming the request happened...) he would have a pretty good 14th Amendment Due Process claim against the NCAA, were he ruled ineligible. This would be a helluva lot stronger than Clarett's Sherman Act claim that made it all the way to the federal circuit court of appeals.

Honestly both of us are acting as lawyers on different sides, we both have a basis for what is going on, neither side is right nor wrong.

My person opinion is that if Cam Newton was found ineligible on one day, then something must have been there that made them want to suspend him.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

So, assuming it's clear that his father did attempt to secure financial reward from at least one school, the question becomes: is his father a "representative" of Cam Newton...

Precisely. The question is what Cam knew. As of today, the NCAA has ruled that he didn't know or authorize his father's assumed solicitations.

There's no way to prove that Cam didn't have knowledge of his father's request...

True, but, again, the burden is on the NCAA, not Cam. See the Due Process Clause. And the Rulebook. And the American Way.

Clearly everyone wants him to be declared ineligible, but unfortunately this case turns on facts, not law or bylaws. Something more has to be shown (or, God forbid, proven) either in actions, knowledge, or compensation for him to go down. That's just the way it is.

 

[IrishinSyria]

Well, first of all this, Sources: Cam and Cecil Newton talked of pay-to-play plan with recruiters - ESPN , makes it seem like Cam did, in fact, know.

Second, it is far from clear to me that everybody has a legal right to play in the NCAA. The due process clause seems less relevant than the rulebook. And since, in the rulebook, an athlete is ruled ineligible if his parents receive benefits, regardless of whether or not the athlete knows about these benefits, it is not clear to me that parents aren't automatically considered representatives of the athlete.

We'll see. My bet is that, because it is in everybody's financial interest to keep this under the table, under the table is precisely where it will stay, at least until the end of the season.

 

[irishtrain]

This isn't the final word. This is just them sweeping it all under the rug until after the season.

As things stand, though, this is complete bull ****. As M.I. said, this has the potential to end amateurism as we know it. Either embrace the concept or don't, don't say it's ok for a parent to go fishing for cash as long as the player doesn't know (wink wink) about it.

Well said, my thoughts are the line from Blazing Saddles- 'we got to protect our phoney baloney business here boys'. This smells like a cover up to get the $$$ and get 2 teams in the BCS bowls. They will deal with the consequences later. I have many Auburn friends and have pulled for them get a shot at a NC since they got shotchanged in 2004 but now I hope they get beat. The SEC is always suspected of the good old boy dont tell on your buddy network but now they just look like shams to me. Great conference great players but I give them no respect now, this smells.

 

[DomerBoy]

NCAA has been a joke for years. What else is new?

 

[WaveDomer]

Well, I think it's pretty simple. LSU lost to Arkansas, dropping them down. Arkansas is ranked 7 in the BCS, so they are probably not going to leap to 1 or 2 for the title game. That leaves Auburn as the only real shot for the NCAA to get a team from their Golden Conference into the title game. The conference already covered their *** by not penalizing Fairley for a few blatant dirty plays against Georgia. So he played against Bama and probably won the game for them with that fumble plus recovery. So Auburn gets to play in the title game, everyone gets paid and fat and happy. No harm done.

Sorry, I am seriously jaded about this garbage.

 

[johnnykillz]

Well, I think it's pretty simple. LSU lost to Arkansas, dropping them down. Arkansas is ranked 7 in the BCS, so they are probably not going to leap to 1 or 2 for the title game. That leaves Auburn as the only real shot for the NCAA to get a team from their Golden Conference into the title game. The conference already covered their *** by not penalizing Fairley for a few blatant dirty plays against Georgia. So he played against Bama and probably won the game for them with that fumble plus recovery. So Auburn gets to play in the title game, everyone gets paid and fat and happy. No harm done.

Sorry, I am seriously jaded about this garbage.

^Boom!

Yup.


You're a genius.

 

[nlroma1o]

Does the NCAA realize how incredibly stupid they look for making a ruling like this? Sometimes you just have to wonder..... There isn't one person I have talked to that thinks that there is any way possible this kid should be eligible to play....

 

[Irish Houstonian]

Well, first of all this, Sources: Cam and Cecil Newton talked of pay-to-play plan with recruiters - ESPN , makes it seem like Cam did, in fact, know.

I agree that if true, he's not eligible. I guess that's the million dollar question.

Second, it is far from clear to me that everybody has a legal right to play in the NCAA. The due process clause seems less relevant than the rulebook. And since, in the rulebook, an athlete is ruled ineligible if his parents receive benefits, regardless of whether or not the athlete knows about these benefits, it is not clear to me that parents aren't automatically considered representatives of the athlete.

I agree that nobody necessarily has a right to play in the NCAA. And I agree that the DPC is far less relevant than the Bylaws. But I believe that if Cam could show that he was being treated differently or arbitrarily under the Bylaws, he would have a good DP case. He clearly has a property interest in his eligibility to play football for Auburn (a state actor) and the NCAA (ruled a "quasi-state actor" for procedural due process claims). So he has a Constitutional right to be treated fairly/equally.

Another interesting tid-bit for legal junkies: he could also bring a breach of contract claim as a third party beneficiary of the contract between the NCAA and Auburn since the NCAA would be in breach of contract by not following its Bylaws. This was recognized as a legitimate cause of action in that CU skier/fb player case (although he lost).

 

[OffensiveAssassin]

So all a recruit needs to do is be able to deny representation. Cool. Carry on, pay-for-play.

 

[dre1919]

Total B.S. Nice NCAA...way to set a precedent that will utterly pave the way for the ruination of college athletics as we know it.

 

[condoms SUCk]

Folks let’s not kid ourselves here, this makes TOTAL sense. The NCAA has a problem on their hands if they rule Cam ineligible. If that were to happen South Carolina has an excellent chance to beat Auburn. That would mean that (taadaa) TCU would have the best shot of ANY BcS/ non BcS school to get into the BcS champ game. Ergo this would blow the whole BcS system to bits and renewed calls for a tournament style post season we ensue. This is all about keeping the power within the big boys and sh!ting on the little guys. I say this with no evidence what so ever and about 6 beers in to my 12 pack. But THIS scenario makes perfect sense to me!