We have the smoking gun pertaining to eligibiltiy

[FlabLoser]

From the ESPN article

Auburn has contended that Newton is an "eligible student-athlete." Newton played in Auburn's 49-31 victory over Georgia last week.</p>

NCAA spokeswoman Stacey Osburn declined to discuss the specifics of the
Newton allegations, but said in general that solicitation of benefits by
a student-athlete's family is an NCAA violation. Osburn said the
potential penalties for such a violation depend on multiple factors,
including the "level of the benefit" being sought and the level of
responsibility of the student-athlete. </p>

Osburn said that <span style="font-weight: bold;">if a university is not deemed culpable in such an
instance, "then it is only a student-athlete eligibility issue." If a
violation did occur and the athlete is ruled ineligible, he could appeal
for reinstatement</span>.</p>

With the voice mail messages, there is practically irrefutable proof that Cecil shopped Cam at MSU. Per the NCAA's words, at the VERY LEAST that makes Cam ineligible.
</p>

If the NCAA has one grain of common sense or consistency (a stretch, I know), they will rule Cam ineligible before the next game.</p>

</p>

</p>