[quote]yonkeyschnitzel wrote:
[quote]BradyZ wrote:
[quote]yonkeyschnitzel wrote:
lol[/quote]
I do feel sorry for that kid. Hopefully in the bowl game he will get a second chance.[/quote]
I feel bad for the way some fans have turned on Brontzman, however I could not be happier that the fucking donkeys are now irrelevant. Go Nevada![/quote]
LOL
Boise State Fucking Donkeys. I like that.
[quote]dumbbellhead wrote:
[quote]gregron wrote:
[quote]BradyZ wrote:
[quote]dumbbellhead wrote:
So basically they acknowledge that there was an infraction of some kind but they don’t have enough evidence at the moment to rule him ineligible to play.
I am not surprised, a lot of this was pointed to his dad and not Cam.[/quote]
this is total bullshit by the NCAA. According to the NCAA it is a violation for any person to solicit money/benefits on behalf of a student athlete. Then they said ‘yeah Cecil Newton tried to solicit benefits for Cam… But thats ok. Cams still eligible.’ LOL
Its only cause Auburn is number 1… The rest of the story will come out by next year and all these wins will be vacated but by that point Newton will be in the NFL, all the schools will have cashed their BCS checks, sold their merch and the NCAA will cash in on the TV ratings.
Its totally lame how this turned out. Auburn finds out about the benefits, declares Cam ineligible, tells the NCAA about it, then the NCAA declares him eligible the next day? WEAAAAAAAAK![/quote]
QFT! Word for word.[/quote]
Definitely agree with you on this one. This really goes to show that the NCAA is a business also, and when it all boils down they are more concerned with profit than purity. They know that ruling the top player on the top team in college football ineligible would significantly affect revenue during the bowl season, so why do it?
[quote]WestCoast7 wrote:
[quote]dumbbellhead wrote:
[quote]gregron wrote:
[quote]BradyZ wrote:
[quote]dumbbellhead wrote:
So basically they acknowledge that there was an infraction of some kind but they don’t have enough evidence at the moment to rule him ineligible to play.
I am not surprised, a lot of this was pointed to his dad and not Cam.[/quote]
this is total bullshit by the NCAA. According to the NCAA it is a violation for any person to solicit money/benefits on behalf of a student athlete. Then they said ‘yeah Cecil Newton tried to solicit benefits for Cam… But thats ok. Cams still eligible.’ LOL
Its only cause Auburn is number 1… The rest of the story will come out by next year and all these wins will be vacated but by that point Newton will be in the NFL, all the schools will have cashed their BCS checks, sold their merch and the NCAA will cash in on the TV ratings.
Its totally lame how this turned out. Auburn finds out about the benefits, declares Cam ineligible, tells the NCAA about it, then the NCAA declares him eligible the next day? WEAAAAAAAAK![/quote]
QFT! Word for word.[/quote]
Definitely agree with you on this one. This really goes to show that the NCAA is a business also, and when it all boils down they are more concerned with profit than purity. They know that ruling the top player on the top team in college football ineligible would significantly affect revenue during the bowl season, so why do it?
[/quote]
I kept telling you all this, nobody listens to the old guy.
However I will say it really sucks that guys like Cam and Bush have to suffer for the greed of their own parents. I mean really you are speaking of a minor, a child, yes to a certain extent legally they are 18 and free to decide. However how many young people are going to go against there parents in a situation like this?
[quote]WestCoast7 wrote:
Definitely agree with you on this one. This really goes to show that the NCAA is a business also, and when it all boils down they are more concerned with profit than purity. They know that ruling the top player on the top team in college football ineligible would significantly affect revenue during the bowl season, so why do it?
[/quote]
Why does the Cinderella factor not play into college football? TCU was the darling of Omaha last baseball season, and the schools noone has ever heard of going deep into the tournament are what make March Madness. So in football why the concerted effort to protect a few big state schools and Notre Dame?
[quote]Spike9726 wrote:
[quote]WestCoast7 wrote:
Definitely agree with you on this one. This really goes to show that the NCAA is a business also, and when it all boils down they are more concerned with profit than purity. They know that ruling the top player on the top team in college football ineligible would significantly affect revenue during the bowl season, so why do it?
[/quote]
Why does the Cinderella factor not play into college football? TCU was the darling of Omaha last baseball season, and the schools noone has ever heard of going deep into the tournament are what make March Madness. In basketball Boise in the Sweet 16 would be a major story. So in football why the concerted effort to protect a few big state schools and Notre Dame? [/quote]
$
[quote]DJHT wrote:
[quote]WestCoast7 wrote:
[quote]dumbbellhead wrote:
[quote]gregron wrote:
[quote]BradyZ wrote:
[quote]dumbbellhead wrote:
So basically they acknowledge that there was an infraction of some kind but they don’t have enough evidence at the moment to rule him ineligible to play.
I am not surprised, a lot of this was pointed to his dad and not Cam.[/quote]
this is total bullshit by the NCAA. According to the NCAA it is a violation for any person to solicit money/benefits on behalf of a student athlete. Then they said ‘yeah Cecil Newton tried to solicit benefits for Cam… But thats ok. Cams still eligible.’ LOL
Its only cause Auburn is number 1… The rest of the story will come out by next year and all these wins will be vacated but by that point Newton will be in the NFL, all the schools will have cashed their BCS checks, sold their merch and the NCAA will cash in on the TV ratings.
Its totally lame how this turned out. Auburn finds out about the benefits, declares Cam ineligible, tells the NCAA about it, then the NCAA declares him eligible the next day? WEAAAAAAAAK![/quote]
QFT! Word for word.[/quote]
Definitely agree with you on this one. This really goes to show that the NCAA is a business also, and when it all boils down they are more concerned with profit than purity. They know that ruling the top player on the top team in college football ineligible would significantly affect revenue during the bowl season, so why do it?
[/quote]
I kept telling you all this, nobody listens to the old guy.
However I will say it really sucks that guys like Cam and Bush have to suffer for the greed of their own parents. I mean really you are speaking of a minor, a child, yes to a certain extent legally they are 18 and free to decide. However how many young people are going to go against there parents in a situation like this? [/quote]
This is really messed up and as a USC fan I’m pissed lol
[quote]DJHT wrote:
[quote]Spike9726 wrote:
[quote]WestCoast7 wrote:
Definitely agree with you on this one. This really goes to show that the NCAA is a business also, and when it all boils down they are more concerned with profit than purity. They know that ruling the top player on the top team in college football ineligible would significantly affect revenue during the bowl season, so why do it?
[/quote]
Why does the Cinderella factor not play into college football? TCU was the darling of Omaha last baseball season, and the schools noone has ever heard of going deep into the tournament are what make March Madness. In basketball Boise in the Sweet 16 would be a major story. So in football why the concerted effort to protect a few big state schools and Notre Dame? [/quote]
$[/quote]
Exactly. Cinderella programs don’t usually have huge followings, thus the stadiums don’t get filled. It’s much easier to fill a basketball stadium or a baseball stadium, especially during a tournament setting when all of the spectators are already there.
Case and point with Stanford. Whatever bowl ends up with Stanford is going to be livid, because we don’t have a huge fan base and nobody is going to travel for that.
[quote]WestCoast7 wrote:
[quote]DJHT wrote:
[quote]Spike9726 wrote:
[quote]WestCoast7 wrote:
Definitely agree with you on this one. This really goes to show that the NCAA is a business also, and when it all boils down they are more concerned with profit than purity. They know that ruling the top player on the top team in college football ineligible would significantly affect revenue during the bowl season, so why do it?
[/quote]
Why does the Cinderella factor not play into college football? TCU was the darling of Omaha last baseball season, and the schools noone has ever heard of going deep into the tournament are what make March Madness. In basketball Boise in the Sweet 16 would be a major story. So in football why the concerted effort to protect a few big state schools and Notre Dame? [/quote]
$[/quote]
Exactly. Cinderella programs don’t usually have huge followings, thus the stadiums don’t get filled. It’s much easier to fill a basketball stadium or a baseball stadium, especially during a tournament setting when all of the spectators are already there.
Case and point with Stanford. Whatever bowl ends up with Stanford is going to be livid, because we don’t have a huge fan base and nobody is going to travel for that.[/quote]
And dont forget sponsors WC all the bowls have sponsors and that is advertising for them. They dont want to see boise vs “anybody” that doesnt get the ratings that Bama vs Oklahoma. Period.
[quote]gregron wrote:
[quote]DJHT wrote:
[quote]WestCoast7 wrote:
[quote]dumbbellhead wrote:
[quote]gregron wrote:
[quote]BradyZ wrote:
[quote]dumbbellhead wrote:
So basically they acknowledge that there was an infraction of some kind but they don’t have enough evidence at the moment to rule him ineligible to play.
I am not surprised, a lot of this was pointed to his dad and not Cam.[/quote]
this is total bullshit by the NCAA. According to the NCAA it is a violation for any person to solicit money/benefits on behalf of a student athlete. Then they said ‘yeah Cecil Newton tried to solicit benefits for Cam… But thats ok. Cams still eligible.’ LOL
Its only cause Auburn is number 1… The rest of the story will come out by next year and all these wins will be vacated but by that point Newton will be in the NFL, all the schools will have cashed their BCS checks, sold their merch and the NCAA will cash in on the TV ratings.
Its totally lame how this turned out. Auburn finds out about the benefits, declares Cam ineligible, tells the NCAA about it, then the NCAA declares him eligible the next day? WEAAAAAAAAK![/quote]
QFT! Word for word.[/quote]
Definitely agree with you on this one. This really goes to show that the NCAA is a business also, and when it all boils down they are more concerned with profit than purity. They know that ruling the top player on the top team in college football ineligible would significantly affect revenue during the bowl season, so why do it?
[/quote]
I kept telling you all this, nobody listens to the old guy.
However I will say it really sucks that guys like Cam and Bush have to suffer for the greed of their own parents. I mean really you are speaking of a minor, a child, yes to a certain extent legally they are 18 and free to decide. However how many young people are going to go against there parents in a situation like this? [/quote]
This is really messed up and as a USC fan I’m pissed lol[/quote]
Greg when I was a kid I was a SMU fan, you do not understand.
So Cam Newton was ruled eligible to play in the SEC Title game. Does this mean Newton was ever ruled ineligible?
he was ineligible for like a day when auburn suspended him (conclusion of the investigation i believe)… then after the ncaa ruling he was ruled eligible to play again…
[quote]Vinnie85 wrote:
he was ineligible for like a day when auburn suspended him (conclusion of the investigation i believe)… then after the ncaa ruling he was ruled eligible to play again… [/quote]
They voted for it before they voted against it.
[quote]DJHT wrote:
Greg when I was a kid I was a SMU fan, you do not understand. [/quote]
I remember. TCU got slapped almost as hard. What happened to the Aggies? Not much.
[quote]Spike9726 wrote:
[quote]DJHT wrote:
Greg when I was a kid I was a SMU fan, you do not understand. [/quote]
I remember. TCU got slapped almost as hard. What happened to the Aggies? Not much. [/quote]
We moved to Texas when I was 10 years old, the school I went to was the Mustangs. So of course this was shortly after the Dickerson time in college, so we were all SMU fans. Man that school has NEVER come back, I dont think June can even resurrect them.
[quote]Spike9726 wrote:
[quote]DJHT wrote:
Greg when I was a kid I was a SMU fan, you do not understand. [/quote]
I remember. TCU got slapped almost as hard. What happened to the Aggies? Not much. [/quote]
I was at A&M when they got slapped, mid-90s. The Aggies did well with the team they had then but after they graduated/left the program suffered. They are really just now coming out of it.
[quote]Vinnie85 wrote:
he was ineligible for like a day when auburn suspended him (conclusion of the investigation i believe)… then after the ncaa ruling he was ruled eligible to play again… [/quote]
he was ruled ineligible the day before by Auburn. Then the next day the NCAA ruled him eligible… The investigation is still ongoing.
i thought the investigation was over? what else are they looking into they already proved that cam supposedly had no knowledge of his dad asking for money from miss state.
edit: nvm… here it is… http://content.usatoday.com/communities/campusrivalry/post/2010/12/ncaa-cam-newton-auburn-eligibility-ruling-defended/1
[quote]Vinnie85 wrote:
i thought the investigation was over? what else are they looking into they already proved that cam supposedly had no knowledge of his dad asking for money from miss state.
edit: nvm… here it is… http://content.usatoday.com/communities/campusrivalry/post/2010/12/ncaa-cam-newton-auburn-eligibility-ruling-defended/1 [/quote]
Exactly… “Case is not closed” = The real findings will come out after the season, wins will be vacated and no one will really care cause its on to a new season and Cam wont be there anymore.
This is a shady situation cause now any parent or agent can solicit benefits and shop kids around and as long as “the kid doesnt know” its ok? (even though the rule book specifically says its not)
so all Reggie Bush had to do was say “I didnt know where my parents got the money for our new house? I thought my dad got a promotion.” and then nothing would happen to him or USC?
If UT, USC, Notre Dame, or Ohio State is #3 does this change the NCAAs attitude?
^ In regard to what Spike Cam’s issue?
Did you hear the quote from the president of the BCS yesterday? I couldnt find it today (didnt look hard either I am at work) but he was saying how all the players in the D1 football dont want a playoff like the D2 etc. The players want things to stay the same. What a crock of horse shit.