Doper Heisman Poll

The Game Room
21

It’s crystal clear what happened here.

Kenny Rogers, well known for his shady job ( and already under investigation by the NFL ) tried to use his position and his ties w/ Mississippi State to reunite Cam Newton and his former OC from Florida, Dan Mullen. Rogers, knowing Cecil’s financial situation, thought he could sway the elder Newton to get Cam to sign w/ Miss State. As a perk, to ensure this happened, Rogers convinced Cecil that Cam would be worth big $$, and that he ( Rogers ) would use his ties to MSU to seal the deal.

Rogers had no pull with anyone at Auburn. He had no pull with Oklahoma or Tennessee, two other schools that recruited Cam Newton and whose coaches have publicly stated that there was nothing unusual about the recruitment of Cam Newton. It was only with Kenny Rogers and Mississippi State that the question of money came up.

Why can’t the media figure this out ? Because it doesn’t make good copy. Quoting Auburn linebacker Josh Bynes talking to a writer from The Sporting News last Wednesday :“If we told you the truth you wouldn’t print it. The truth doesn’t sell.”

I’m not surprised that posters on open newspaper blogs got duped by a couple of unscrupulous writers that wanted to increase the number of hits on their blogs. I’m surprised and disappointed that members of The Straightdope, a site known for critical thought and demanding accuracy of statements, would fall for this crap.

As I said, if anyone here has reliable information about Cam Newton or Auburn University doing anything wrong in Cam’s recruitment, please post it here and forward copies to the NCAA and SEC offices. Their investigators came up with nothing after months of scrutiny, but you might have just the tid-bit they’ve been looking for.

The issues that affect Mississippi State aside, the investigation about Auburn and Cam Newton is over. The NCAA had no deadline to meet. They could have waited months before they came out with a ruling on this. You can bet that when they cleared Cam Newton and Auburn of wrongdoing last week, they were 99.9999% certain that this is the end of it.

Danny Weurffel is just as likely to get stripped of his 1996 Heisman as is Cam Newton, if he wins it.

22

great points John Carter of Mars. Apparently many here think Cam is guilty until proven innocent.

23

Cam deserves the Heisman, whether he’s guilty or not. And if the NCAA ruled him eligible for the SEC Championship game as well as the BCS championship game, how can anyone vote against him based on just the allegations?

For those who voted ABC, would you ban him from the BCS Championship as well? If so, how would you feel if the investigation shows that he’s completely innocent? You’ve just potentially robbed a kid of legendary status and the greatest moment of his life. There’s certainly no guarantee that he’ll have nearly the success at the next level.

I agree that it certainly appears that his father is guilty. But you can’t penalize a kid for the actions of his father.

24

First of all, yes, you can and should penalize him for the actions of his father. Keep in mind that until the NCAA reinstated him, the assumption by everybody was that if the NCAA could prove his father solicited money, then he was ineligible. That was why the NCAA’s ruling to reinstate was such a shock: they said “yes, there is proof that his father solicited money for his recruitment, but we’ll reinstate him anyway.” It was a shocking ruling that upended the established amateurism rules.

Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delany said as much:

Bottom line: because Cam was in the midst of a Heisman-worthy season and Auburn is number 1, the NCAA chickened out and let him play out the season. We don’t have to worry about whether the investigation eventually shows if he’s innocent: it’s already shown that he isn’t. That’s not even in question: he’s guilty by virtue of his father soliciting benefits in his recruitment. It’s just a matter of the appropriate punishment.

If Cam was a backup tight end for Cleveland State, does anyone doubt he would have been ruled ineligible?

25

Since when do assumptions matter? :dubious:

26

I voted for Watt, just because (a) he goes to my alma mater, and (b) no one else will. :smiley:

27

The money discussions were between Mississippi State booster Kenny Rogers and Cam’s dad, Cecil Newton. If Cecil had accepted money and If Cam Newton had subsequently signed with Mississippi State there would have been full reason to rule him ineligible and he wouldn’t have played at all this season.

If Cam were a backup tight end for Cleveland State and his father had discussed money with Florida State, the decision would have been exactly the same as it is now. He’s eligible.

Those trying to compare this situation with Reggie Bush are way off base. In the case of Reggie Bush, actual benefits were received, the athlete played for the school that provided the illegal benefits and at least one assistant coach at that school was proved to have been aware of the situation for four years. There is no similarity between the Reggie Bush situation and Cam Newton’s.

After months of investigation, on Monday,November 29, the NCAA notified Auburn University that a violation had occurred. (That violation being that Cam’s father had discussed money with Mississippi State booster Kenny Rogers) Tuesday, November 30 Auburn declared Newton ineligible and requested immediate reinstatement. This was granted without condition, on Wednesday, December 1st.

Has it not occurred to anybody that over months of investigation Auburn University and the NCAA have been in constant contact? Does anybody think Auburn would have played Cam Newton at all this season if there were any question how this would turn out?

Auburn and Cam are clean, and the people in charge of such things at Auburn have been confident of that since August.

Anyway, Reggie Bush is not the case you want to look at to compare with Cam Newton. Look at the Albert Means case at Alabama. (although money did actually change hands in the case of Means)

Alabama boosters were found to have paid Mean’s high school coaches to obtain his signature to play at Alabama. Means was declared ineligible to play for Alabama but was fine to transfer and play at Memphis.
There’s the closest precedent for the Cam Newton ruling, and it was handled the same way then.

No “can of worms” has been opened. If a player is ineligible to play at the school that discussed extra benefits with a family member, where’s the loophole?

28

If I were making the ruling, yes I would say Cam Newton is hereby ineligible. Otherwise, what’s the point? What’s to stop the next big rectuit’s dad from trying to collect for his son’s commitment to a university? I don’t care whether Cam knew about his dad’s actions or not. Frankly, I find it a little hard to believe that he had absolutely no idea what his dad was doing, but it doesn’t matter.

Last time I checked Matt Barkley had not committd any NCAA violations and yet he (and every other USC player/coach) is, in a sense, being punished for the actions of Reggie Bush and Bush’s family.

29

Reality check: http://www.stiffarmtrophy.com/

Haters gonna hate.

30

Apparently Doper Voters are not in tune with the voters that count. (or vice versa)

31

What were the eligibility questions about Troy Smith?

32

IIRC, he got caught taking $500 from a booster.

33

You’re really asking this question? Of course they’d play Newton! I imagine the conversation went something like this:

Person with some degree of power at Auburn 1: Should we play Cam Newton? I mean, what if he turns out to be ineligible because his dad is a dick?

Person with some degree of power at Auburn 2: No, I want to go 7-5 this year. Are you fucking kidding me? I’d be tarred and feathered if I recommended benching Cam!

Pwsdop@A1: Actually, yes I was kidding you. Ha!

And… scene.

Look, John Carter, you’ve made your point a million times that there’s no evidence to date that Newton has received money to play at Auburn. To which I respond, no shit Sherlock. But I refuse to believe that Cecil Newton turned down $180,000 for his son to play at Mississippi State to play for $0.00 at Auburn. Evidence may or may not turn up about the amount of money Newton did collect (presumably >$180,000) from Auburn boosters – I’d like to think there’s always evidence in this day or age – but it doesn’t matter. Guy’s as guilty as OJ. Deal with it.

34

Newton is a first-year starter. He was the top-rated junior college prospect coming out last year, but he’d attempted exactly 12 passes against D1 prior to this season (all when he was at Florida).

Auburn was 23rd in the preseason coaches’ poll. Gene Chizik could never have started him, and nobody but the boosters and Gainesville police would ever know who the hell he was.

35

Auburn does not play by the rules. I doubt any major football program does. They all adjust their morals as needed. Cam and his dads crime is they were too blatant and did it with no class. That is an unforgivable transgression in the NCAA.

36

Blackmon.

Partly homer (kid’s amazing). With many parts of ABC.

“…outstanding college football player whose performance best exhibits the pursuit of excellence with integrity.” Yeah - completely discounting the stuff at UF, the shopping stuff, which he can’t have not known about, is too much.

Though I would throw a vote to Marecic, the LB/FB at Stanford if it was an option.

37

I’m not saying Auburn sticking with Cam Newton in early September was a no-brainer. What I AM saying is that when the stuff from Kenny Rogers came out (late October/early November, if I recall correctly), Auburn was already rolling with Newton, and there was no way in hell they’d consider yanking him at that point over a fear of some NCAA sanctions later, maybe.

So again, to answer John Carter’s question: “Does anybody think Auburn would have played Cam Newton at all this season if there were any question how this would turn out?” I answer emphatically HELL YES. The Auburn Board of Reagents (or whatever) could have videotape of Cam Newton himself making it rain with the hundreds of thousands of dollars he’d collected from Auburn boosters, and I’m sure they’d shrug their shoulders and say, “Well, we’re already fucked, since Newton’s been playing all year… let’s just keep going and hopefully win a National Championship before that fucking comes our way.”

38

“This stuff” came out in January. MSU reported it to the SEC office as soon as they learned that Cam Newton had signed with Auburn instead of State, which is passing strange since State knew about the November 27th 2009 discussion since, well, November 27th 2009. As long as they had a shot at Cam, they were happy to stay mum.

The SEC has been investigating since January, Auburn has been investigating since January and the NCAA has been investigating since July. That’s a lot of looking and nothing found.

Auburn’s compliance department has the say over who plays and who doesn’t, for all Auburn teams. Their job, as instructed by AU athletic director Jay Jacobs, “Is not to help Auburn win games. Yor job is to keep Auburn out of trouble”. They are widely known as the toughest in the country. Hiring a former NCAA vice president for compliance to manage the compliance dept. at Auburn makes a statement, to anyone that will listen.

Auburn knew full well before the season started that there would be no problem with playing Cam Newton.

39

IMO, we will find out how many voters totally snubbed Cam Newton because of the allegations.

I can’t imagine any informed voter leaving Newton of the ballot completely unless they were intentionally snubbing him.

Informed Heisman Voter = Oxymoron?

40

Newton won a few awards last night. I’m guessing he will win the Heisman, even if some voters are scared away by the accusations.