AUBURN, Ala. — Amid growing concerns that the Cam Newton ruling opened a loophole for parents to "shop around" their student-athlete children to colleges, NCAA president Mark Emmert issued a statement Thursday saying the organization plans to amend its bylaws "so that type of behavior is not a part of intercollegiate athletics."Emmert's statements came a day after the NCAA reinstated the Auburn quarterback's eligibility in time for the SEC championship game.
Newton was briefly ruled ineligible Tuesday for violations the NCAA concluded his father, Cecil, committed during the quarterback's recruitment last fall.
The NCAA said Newton didn't know his father engaged in pay-for-play talks with Mississippi State. Auburn applied for Newton's reinstatement immediately, and his eligibility was restored Wednesday with no conditions.
Criticism came swiftly after the ruling went public, prompting Emmert to make clarifying statements.
"We recognize that many people are outraged at the notion that a parent or anyone else could 'shop around' a student-athlete and there would possibly not be repercussions on the student-athlete’s eligibility," he wrote.
"I’m committed to further clarifying and strengthening our recruiting and amateurism rules so they promote appropriate behavior by students, parents, coaches and third parties."
But he noted many in the media and public have wrongly compared the Newton ruling to other high-profile NCAA cases while ignoring the differences.
"While comparisons may be human nature," he wrote, "they should at least be made based on the facts."
Emmert wrote the NCAA makes each decision based on its merits, adding that no two are identical.
"In the Cam Newton reinstatement case, there was not sufficient evidence available to establish he had any knowledge of his father’s actions and there was no indication he actually received any impermissible benefit," he wrote.
"If a student-athlete does not receive tangible benefits, that is a different situation from a student-athlete or family member who receives cash, housing or other benefits or knowingly competes and is compensated as a professional athlete."
Emmert also made clear the distinction between how the NCAA determines the university's culpability and the student-athlete's.
"Universities are accountable for rules violations through the infractions process," he wrote. "Student-athletes are responsible for rules violations through the eligibility process."
He reiterated that the reinstatement process is likely to conclude before the close of an investigation. The NCAA said Wednesday that the Newton case is not officially closed.
Many have questioned the decision's timing, considering SEC championship game takes place Saturday, when Auburn will try to clinch a spot in the BCS national championship game.
Emmert wrote that the NCAA tries to be as timely and thorough as possible.
"Sometimes decisions are rendered in one day and other times it takes longer given the complexity of the matter," he wrote. "In all cases, the staff is aware of the next date of competition for the student and does everything possible to render a decision before that date."
The Newton family lawyer, George Lawson, also spoke for the first time since the ruling, telling Atlanta TV reporter Mark Winne that the Newtons never accepted money for their son's services.
He said Cam is "relieved" and "confident" now that his eligibility has been clarified by the NCAA.
“I would hope that it would be at an end," Lawson said of the ordeal. "But if it is not at an end, Cam and his family will continue to participate.”
3 comments:
Talking heads are talking about how quickly this was settled. The NCAA has been on it for five months. As today's statement from them clarifies, eligibility cases are settled rather quickly. See A.J. Green and M. Darious.
Institutional cases are slower but Auburn is not being investigated, so this pretty much wraps it up.
Mississippi State and MSU booster Kenny Rogers may be at it for a while, however.
Andy has highlighted the three important issues in this determination.
...........................
"In the Cam Newton reinstatement case, there was not sufficient evidence available to establish he had any knowledge of his father’s actions and there was no indication he actually received any impermissible benefit," he wrote.
"If a student-athlete does not receive tangible benefits, that is a different situation from a student-athlete or family member who receives cash, housing or other benefits or knowingly competes and is compensated as a professional athlete."
Emmert also made clear the distinction between how the NCAA determines the university's culpability and the student-athlete's.
"Universities are accountable for rules violations through the infractions process," he wrote. "Student
Read more: http://wareagleextra.blogspot.com/2010/12/ncaa-president-mark-emmert-clarifies.html#ixzz1737OdZuu
...............................
However, the media (ESPN and then everybody else) reported only the finding that "Cam Newton didn't know his dad was shopping him" as the reason for the decision.
.
Emmert has done well to expound further on what were mitigating circumstances, specifically the fact that no benefits were received. This clarifies the specific issues in this case and establishes a distinction from the Bush case, as well as other cases.
.
I also like the part where "Universities are accountable for rules violations..." Auburn did its part and is cleared. But this looks like MSU is going to have a sit down with the godfather of college football.
The use of the phrase, "shopping around" is a perfect example of how the media misleads people. This phrase makes it look as if Cecil Newton & Rodgers were taking this offer to many schools to see who would pay. The current evidence demonstrates did not happen. Two other schools who recruited Cam have publicly stated there was nothing unusual about the process. If that is true then he wasn't being "shopped around". The only thing that makes sense is that Rodgers convinced Cecil he could use his connections at MSU to get money. Which explains Cecil just sitting back and observing as Rodgers made the offers. It explains why no other offers seem to have been put forth. What it doesn't explain is why there seems to have been so much contact with 2 MSU boosters who are not suppose to be involved in recruiting. Who wants to bet Mullins is headed to Miami so as not to be around for how this may turn out.
Post a Comment