The CardBoard
Crap - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Crap (/thread-1136.html)

Pages: 1 2 3

Re: Crap - CowboyIndian - 01-19-2011

Quote:The NCAA has told players for YEARS that whatever your parents do on your behalf will impact THEIR standing.  

There were a lot of shocked folks (players, ex players and AD administrators) when Mark Emmert suddenly decided otherwise.

That was always my understanding of the NCAA/Newton situation. Emmert\'s decision overturned an established precedent.

Re: Crap - ealtice - 01-19-2011

Quote:
Quote:The NCAA has told players for YEARS that whatever your parents do on your behalf will impact THEIR standing.  

There were a lot of shocked folks (players, ex players and AD administrators) when Mark Emmert suddenly decided otherwise.

That was always my understanding of the NCAA/Newton situation. Emmert\'s decision overturned an established precedent.

The question is, did Emmert decide to overturn that decision based on the advice of counsel that, in fact, it would not hold up if legally challenged for the reasons stated earlier in this thread.

I had the same understanding as you guys, about the parent/child relationship in this matter.  If in fact they can\'t pursue that line of argument anymore, the enforcement arm of the NCAA will be all but dead, IMO (unless the rule violators are just total idiots and leave obvious links among family members)

Re: Crap - 97fan - 01-19-2011

What was unprecedented about the Cam Newton situation was not that it involved a new issue - namely, whether a player can be held responsible for the sins of a parent. As Lefty noted, the NCAA held for years that, yes, they can.

What was new here was the prospect of an NCAA enforcement action derailing a football national championship run. It\'s one thing for the NCAA to rule that Reggie Bush was ineligible five years later. It\'s quite another for them to end Auburn\'s championship run. Who knows what the consequences of that might have been? Maybe the SEC starts talking about withdrawing from the NCAA. Maybe the whole fiction that the NCAA is built on - that these are amateur student-athletes - starts to come under political pressure. Emmert couldn\'t have known what the ramifications would be, so he just called the dogs off. Principle had nothing to do with it.


Re: Crap - pefloresjr - 01-19-2011

Garvin was right on point when he noted that the problem is that there is insufficient evidence tying Auburn or any Auburn booster to Newton or any money given to his father.  There is reason for suspicion, but I\'m not sure there is even enough reasonable suspicion to support getting a search warrant.  There is nothing close to a preponderance of the evidence (50.1% the common civil standard) that Auburn or Newton did anything wrong.  

Do I think there is something fishy there?  Absolutely.  Can I prove anything?  Absolutely not.  Without proof, nobody can be held accountable.  

I don\'t think the NCAA was really changing precedent, it was just trying to justify itself for not taking any action.  If they had proof of a payment to Newton\'s dad, they would have done something.  (I\'m not sure of the impact the SEC bias would have had on that something.)

Cheers,
Pete F.

Why Sarao flipped - yvonne - 01-19-2011

http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/sports/article_fc76f125-4b45-519c-a18c-d56b20f83592.html

Quote:"I wanted something a little more stable," Sarao said. "(Stanford) said they had a bunch of people lined up (at defensive coordinator) and would get someone to help me out at linebacker. They didn\'t get anybody yet."


Re: Crap - CrazedZooChimp - 01-19-2011

Oof, I really hope we hire someone before anyone else leaves...

Re: Crap - Leftcoast - 01-19-2011

Under the "old" rules, if Cam Newton\'s dad shopped him to even one school, successfully or unsuccessfully, he would be out of compliance and ineligible.   The fact that he later went to Auburn (or heck, Stanford) is irrelevant.  

Or at least irrelevant from a COMPLIANCE standpoint.

The suspicion here, as 97Fan points out, is that Auburn\'s #1 ranking and NC contender status very much figured into the ruling.   And the suspicious timing.   And the "double secret" one-day suspension.   And the sudden heaving overboard of 30+ years of precedent.

Clearly, if you\'re going to blatantly break the rules it helps if you play for the #1 ranked team and are booked to play in the SEC and National Championship games.



Re: Crap - Spiny_Norman - 01-19-2011

Quote:"I wanted something a little more stable," Sarao said. "(Stanford) said they had a bunch of people lined up (at defensive coordinator) and would get someone to help me out at linebacker. They didn\'t get anybody yet."

I certainly understand that a recruited athlete may want the process to end as soon as possible.  But signing day is two weeks away.  Sarao is not under a deadline.  if he was strongly considering Stanford, why could he not wait until the new DC is named?

Re: Crap - tmswope - 01-19-2011

Quote:
Quote:"I wanted something a little more stable," Sarao said. "(Stanford) said they had a bunch of people lined up (at defensive coordinator) and would get someone to help me out at linebacker. They didn\'t get anybody yet."

I certainly understand that a recruited athlete may want the process to end as soon as possible.  But signing day is two weeks away.  Sarao is not under a deadline.  if he was strongly considering Stanford, why could he not wait until the new DC is named?

Took the words right out of my fingers.  Makes me wonder if USC gave him a "deadline" or something...




Of course, what stinks about the USC pitch - Redrum - 01-19-2011

Is that just over a year ago,  USC was making the exact opposite pitch,  the Stanford pitch,  to its recruits.   Carroll had just left and Kiffin had just come on board.   Even though he brought his dad along as DC,   he was putting together a staff just like we are now.  But Kiffin was telling all the recruits to hang tight,  the staff would be filled out.

The irritating thing about Sarao\'s argument is having a DC and LB coach lined up at USC doesn\'t mean a thing for his development as a player.   He won\'t see those guys until summer,  even if they\'re on USC\'s staff right now.   Doesn\'t compute.

Re: Crap - 97fan - 01-19-2011

Quote:Makes me wonder if USC gave him a "deadline" or something...

Maybe...and if that\'s what happened, then who knows, Stanford might still have a shot at Sarao if we hire a new DC soon.

The other possibility is that Stanford\'s coaching change and DC vacancy prompted Sarao to look for a Plan B...and when he got to LA and saw Hollywood, the girls, how SC football players are treated, etc., Plan B became Plan A. If that\'s the case, then we have no shot.

Re: Crap - tmswope - 01-19-2011

Quote:
Quote:Makes me wonder if USC gave him a "deadline" or something...

The other possibility is that Stanford\'s coaching change and DC vacancy prompted Sarao to look for a Plan B...and when he got to LA and saw Hollywood, the girls, how SC football players are treated, etc., Plan B became Plan A. If that\'s the case, then we have no shot.

This is what I\'m afraid of.  I tried to get a friend of mine to come to Stanford to play baseball with me.  But after he went down to Austin, got wined and dined, saw their facilities, saw the living quarters, and (perhaps, most importantly for this particular guy) hung out with some cleat chasers...then he realized that he didn\'t have to go to class because there are "tutors" who pretty much do everything for them if they want them to...he became a Longhorn and sort of forgot about Stanford.


Re: Crap - Pastor - 01-19-2011

Lefty....

exactly, so the way around the rule is to promise FUTURE employment, gifts or benefits....then after the kid leaves, take the benefit, gift etc. from a booster or the school....unless a paper trail shows the quid pro quo, I don\'t think there\'s anything the NCAA can do about it

So if Oregon makes a deal to give LaMike a Land Rover 2 years after he graduates for his LOI today, then what could the NCAA do absent a paper trail?

Re: Crap - Leftcoast - 01-19-2011

I suspect nothing can be done unless you show a "quid pro quo" relationship.   If you hire someone\'s dad after the athlete leaves school and state he was the most qualified applicant then nothing can be done - or, most likely, SHOULD be done.

As someone mentioned Stanford hired Jack Elway ...

It probably is a moot point - the folks who make these agreements aren\'t usually into deferred gratification and trust.   To use a nearby example, I doubt Jelani Gardner\'s dad would have accepted Todd Bozeman\'s assurance that he\'d get his same $40K in a brown paper bag just 6 years in the future.

Re: Crap - jalapeno - 01-19-2011

The bond between a recruit and his posistion coach should never be under-estimated. Sarao said that Harbaugh leaving didn\'t bother him much, but if the DC left, he\'d be looking to leave. I don\'t know why some of ya\'ll were surprised. He said it about a week before he flipped.

Re: Crap - fullmetal - 01-19-2011

The NCAA isn\'t a court of law deciding life or death--the standard is not "without a shadow of a doubt."  I\'d take "beyond reasonable doubt."  If reasonable is the standard, Auburn and Newton have a lot for which to answer.

cardhorn--I know what you mean :(  By the way, has anyone noticed that the annual Stanford vs. Texas baseball series is back in Austin for a second consecutive year?  They were here last year...shouldn\'t they be in Palo Alto?  (This means a lot more stress planning for me in the next week.)

Re: Crap - fyao - 01-19-2011

Sounds like Sarao somehow fell in love with SC and is just looking for an excuse to justify his switch.  If really he wanted to be here, he would wait to see who the new coaches are.  Surprising that having no bowls to play in is ok with him though.