First, it saysMSU first went to the SEC in January. I thought the original story was that MSU turned in information to the SEC before Newton committed to anybody. If we didn't do it until January, wasn't that after Newton committed? MSU should have either notified the SEC of requests for money before or not at all.
Second, since it apparently didn't go to the SEC until after Newton's committment, why isn'tMSU taking this opportunity to distance itself from any allegations against other schools? Seems like it would be easy for Stricklin to say MSU notified the SEC of being approached by people requesting money (allegedly) on behalf of the Newton family, that MSU brought the issue to the attention to the SEC to ensure it was clear that MSU was not involved with any violations, that MSU thought notifying the SEC was even more important considering at least one former player was claiming to represent Newton, and that it has no knowledge of other schools participation in any violations other than what it was told by Newton's alleged representative (or Cecil himself, if applicable). I'm guessing since Stricklin is not taking this opportunity to distance MSU,hemust have implicated other schools, which I hope he didn't do without some damn good evidence, like video or audio tape.