Not being particularly familiar with all of the NCAA rules, how clean are we exactly in the Newton case? I imagine we have at minimum some secondary violations, but if it is worse than that, I am not sure what they might be. Anyone better with this stuff that can legitimately answer this?
Knowing what we know now, how clean are we?
- Thread starter msudogsrule01
- Start date
Why would this guy be considered a booster? Doesn't his son play for Georgia Tech. If I was a booster, my son would play for the team I donate to. If it is because he gives money to the program, well hell I am a booster. I just sent in 25 dollars to the bulldog club last week.
If Bell was actually called by Cecil regarding recruiting and they spoke, university guidelines are that he not discuss the sport in question at Mississippi State and report the contact to the university. He complied with that second portion, but in a roundabout way. I don't think there's anything that would prohibit him from calling Bond to discuss the matter, but there might be a clause somewhere that could be used to get at Bell since he didn't call it in himself. If they discussed State football, that's a violation.
Worst case scenario: Slap on the hand for Bell....something like he couldn't purchase tickets or give money to the school for a year.
If we had someone associated with the program, like boosters, discussing recruiting with Cam, we appear to have turned in that information. However, all this is coming from a single ESPN report, and I think it's likely that actually turns out to either be coaches, athletic staff, or coaches' family.
Worst case scenario: Disassociation of any boosters involved for a few years, minor penalties on how our coaches can recruit.
If we knew of violations and intentionally sat on them for a bit before reporting, that would be something, but not much. The NCAA can't afford to come down hard on a school that turns itself in for something like this. That being said, I don't see anything that, knowing our school's staff capacity, schedule, and past events, would indicate we actually sat on anything when it comes to the NCAA. The SEC isn't going to do jacksquat in public if we hid something from them that we turned over to the NCAA and it turns out be a smoking gun.
Worst case scenario: Minor penalties on how our coaches can recruit, pissed off conference office if Slive survives.
Bottom line: we started this investigation, and appear to have followed the spirit of the rules, if not the exact letter in every single instance known so far. If the NCAA gets to clean up some major recruiting stuff, we'll get off as scot free as the other schools besides Bama did in the Means case.
Worst case scenario: Slap on the hand for Bell....something like he couldn't purchase tickets or give money to the school for a year.
If we had someone associated with the program, like boosters, discussing recruiting with Cam, we appear to have turned in that information. However, all this is coming from a single ESPN report, and I think it's likely that actually turns out to either be coaches, athletic staff, or coaches' family.
Worst case scenario: Disassociation of any boosters involved for a few years, minor penalties on how our coaches can recruit.
If we knew of violations and intentionally sat on them for a bit before reporting, that would be something, but not much. The NCAA can't afford to come down hard on a school that turns itself in for something like this. That being said, I don't see anything that, knowing our school's staff capacity, schedule, and past events, would indicate we actually sat on anything when it comes to the NCAA. The SEC isn't going to do jacksquat in public if we hid something from them that we turned over to the NCAA and it turns out be a smoking gun.
Worst case scenario: Minor penalties on how our coaches can recruit, pissed off conference office if Slive survives.
Bottom line: we started this investigation, and appear to have followed the spirit of the rules, if not the exact letter in every single instance known so far. If the NCAA gets to clean up some major recruiting stuff, we'll get off as scot free as the other schools besides Bama did in the Means case.
which i have said since the beginning - there is absolutely no way we go forward without being 100% clean with the entire recruiting of Cam Newton.
If it's just giving money to the program, then we should all send in $1 to Ole Miss and start contacting recruits. We may not get any punishment because if the NCAA decides to punish us for a booster that really has many other interests before ours, then it will deter other universities from turning in boosters who may be helping other programs out in better ways.<div>
</div><div>Also, is there a method for the university to officially ostracize a booster?</div>
</div><div>Also, is there a method for the university to officially ostracize a booster?</div>
The Revuhrand Cecil try to sell his player to tMSU, our coaches refused to play that game, Cecil offers his son to Auburn, Auburn gladly pays. We're innocent, Auburn is guilty, and they're going down hard.
The only people who say tMSU is in trouble, are Alabama journalists or message board posters having fun. National journalists agree with me.
The only people who say tMSU is in trouble, are Alabama journalists or message board posters having fun. National journalists agree with me.
<font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><font size="4">The NCAA defines a booster as:</font>
* An individual who is a member of the institution's athletics booster
club.
* An individual who has made financial contributions to the booster club
or the Athletic Department.
* An individual who is involved in providing benefits (e.g. summer jobs)
to prospects or enrolled student-athletes.
* An individual who has been otherwise involved in promoting the University (i.e. buying season tickets).
<font size="3">Remember: Once you are identified as a booster, you never lose that identity. </font></font>
* An individual who is a member of the institution's athletics booster
club.
* An individual who has made financial contributions to the booster club
or the Athletic Department.
* An individual who is involved in providing benefits (e.g. summer jobs)
to prospects or enrolled student-athletes.
* An individual who has been otherwise involved in promoting the University (i.e. buying season tickets).
<font size="3">Remember: Once you are identified as a booster, you never lose that identity. </font></font>
Did we continue recruiting Cam after this? If we did and didn't disassociate ourselves with his recruitment, what does that say? I don't know.
My guess is that we heard that and our coaches reported the matter to the higher ups. The phone calls were also reported to the higher ups. We ended our recruitment of Cam as soon as the Bill Bell message came in, and that was that. I have no knowledge of us continuing to pursue him after that message, but I could be wrong (probably am).
My guess is that we heard that and our coaches reported the matter to the higher ups. The phone calls were also reported to the higher ups. We ended our recruitment of Cam as soon as the Bill Bell message came in, and that was that. I have no knowledge of us continuing to pursue him after that message, but I could be wrong (probably am).
Goldie McClendon receives car from some guy in Batesville, who is then considered a booster. Goldie never plays again, nothing happens to Ole Miss. So maybe Newton never plays, and we are free (even though we didn't provide a car). Just saying. This was the precedent set for Ole Miss.
I do know there is a method to disown a booster, but I am not familiar with how that might actually go about.
that if he chose Mississippi State, we would have never reported anything.
Hell - maybe his dad chose Auburn since he wasn't going to get paid - that Auburn was the best choice. But logic says if his dad was asking for money and we weren't going to give him any and Cecil chooses Auburn for Cam out of nowhere, then logic dictates that money was exchanged somewhere.
Hell - maybe his dad chose Auburn since he wasn't going to get paid - that Auburn was the best choice. But logic says if his dad was asking for money and we weren't going to give him any and Cecil chooses Auburn for Cam out of nowhere, then logic dictates that money was exchanged somewhere.
GAVE somebody something or OFFERED to give somebody something the NCAA better think long and hard about dinging us in any way for some nitpicky secondary violations (visits or anything else). We didn't HAVE to come forward with any of this crap and now that we have look at all the negative backlash on us. If the NCAA EVER wants schools to actually try to police this mess and do things the right way and report when there are issues then they better not punish us for this. If they do, I will never again blame our folks for sitting on information again if we have any. And if Auburn gets off scott free in this deal I probably wouldn't even blame our folks for paying for any program changer-type players (like a Cam Newton) that comes along next time asking for a load of money. So far, we COULD have paid and didn't and we are catching all the flak. Auburn, on the other hand, SO FAR is having to answer for nothing yet it was pretty common knowledge even last December around the circles that know that a payoff was made by Auburn to get him.
This has been my concern all along.
Cam wants to come to State to play for Mullen.
Rogers shows up telling the Newtons he can score them some cash for signing with State because he is conected.
Cecil sees an opportunity to fix up his church and line his pockets, so says he needs about 100K
States sees red flags all over the place and says no dice, turns it over to the SEC.
Cecil gets the red *** becausewe wouldn't pay and turned He and Rogers in to cover our asses so he tells Cam we are a no go and says you are playing for Auburn which is closer to home, etc.
Auburn is now clean and State looks the bad guy. Not sure if it will hurt us or not (I can't see anywhere we can burned by the NCAA), but anything teams can use against you in recruiting they will.
This actually makes sense with much of what we know. Put a slight twist in the way you think of the "the money was just too much" statement, maybe it wasn't that Auburn payed but that we wouldn't and he couldn't talk pops into seeing past that.
This all makes a lot of sense if you simply add to what is out there that Rogers initiated the contact with the Newtons and not the other way around.
Cam wants to come to State to play for Mullen.
Rogers shows up telling the Newtons he can score them some cash for signing with State because he is conected.
Cecil sees an opportunity to fix up his church and line his pockets, so says he needs about 100K
States sees red flags all over the place and says no dice, turns it over to the SEC.
Cecil gets the red *** becausewe wouldn't pay and turned He and Rogers in to cover our asses so he tells Cam we are a no go and says you are playing for Auburn which is closer to home, etc.
Auburn is now clean and State looks the bad guy. Not sure if it will hurt us or not (I can't see anywhere we can burned by the NCAA), but anything teams can use against you in recruiting they will.
This actually makes sense with much of what we know. Put a slight twist in the way you think of the "the money was just too much" statement, maybe it wasn't that Auburn payed but that we wouldn't and he couldn't talk pops into seeing past that.
This all makes a lot of sense if you simply add to what is out there that Rogers initiated the contact with the Newtons and not the other way around.
He never met with Newton, he was called by Kenny Rogers and then turned it in. Guy can't help if someone calls him. I don't see anything that points to Bell doing something wrong.Blacklabelreb said: