In our previous post, we noted that the NCAA has chosen to put its head in the sand in the Cam Newton case, and it’s important to understand why it has taken that tack. Reinstating Newton was in the best interests of Auburn University, the SEC and the NCAA. It reserved their options for more serious findings, and possibly punishment, later – after a potential financial windfall for the school, the conference, and college football in general.
Statements and comments by the NCAA regarding its investigative process are definitive that the process is completely separate from a decision on eligibility. In other words, the Southeastern Conference or Auburn University can, and in this case did, make decisions on eligibility prior to the conclusion of the investigation, based on information released by the NCAA. The school made the decision to suspend Newton immediately after the NCAA concluded that his father had violated its rules, but turned around and declared him eligible the following day when the NCAA advised that it didn’t have sufficient evidence to declare that the quarterback was aware of his father’s activities. These decisions allow Newton to continue playing and increase the anticipation and hype (read $$$) to set up the first true college football national championship game that pits the No.1 and No.2 teams, both undefeated, against each other. (Note: Even though each team had another game to play when the decision was made, the conventional wisdom was that both Auburn [ranked No. 1] and Oregon [ranked No. 2] would win their final games.) The decision to allow Newton to play also left him eligible for the Heisman Trophy, for which he appears to be the favored candidate. Both of these situations are more exciting (again read $$$) with Newton in the picture.
A completed investigation that finds more culpability on the part of Cam Newton, while potentially leading to sanctions or even rescissions of awards or championships, will have little financial impact on the entities involved. No doubt the critics of the process would still call for changes and harsher penalties, but the profits would have been made. Based on the following by Kevin Lennon, the NCAA’s vice president for academic and membership affairs, it is unlikely that Auburn University would suffer any sanctions, as the last sentence appears to definitively absolve its program.
“Our members have established rules for a fair and equal recruitment of student-athletes, as well as to promote integrity in the recruiting process… In determining how a violation impacts a student-athlete’s eligibility, we must consider the young person’s responsibility. Based on the information available to the reinstatement staff at this time, we do not have sufficient evidence that Cam Newton or anyone from Auburn was aware of this activity, which led to his reinstatement. From a student-athlete reinstatement perspective, Auburn University met its obligation under NCAA bylaw 14.11.1. Under this threshold, the student-athlete has not participated while ineligible.”
By the time this investigation and its aftermath have run their course, Newton will likely be playing professional football, potentially profiting from his performance and the associated accolades. He could be stripped of the Heisman if he wins it, but, while embarrassing, it would otherwise have little impact on his future. Moreover, all of the entities who stand to profit from Newton’s current eligibility to play in a national championship, and compete for a Heisman Trophy, will have banked their substantial profits.
Another prime example of the hypocrisy of the NCAA. They suspend players for getting a free pair of shoes from a local Foot Locker but yet Cam continues to play despite the fact that his father shopped him around for $200,000! Nothing against Cam, but the NCAA needs fixing.
ReplyDelete