Cam Newton or his handler wanted money?

[jojo]

On November 4th, ESPN and The NY Times independently broke the news that the NCAA was looking into MSU’s recruitment of Cam Newton and the story quickly consumed daily news cycles. Reports indicate that the NCAA is moving quickly in an effort to reach some sort of conclusion on this issue. That said, the slow news week in the Cam Newton story represents a chance to catch up on everything that has been reported on this issue and to review just what we actually do know about this story.

What follows below is a summary outline of the events (please provide corrections or point out omissions as needed) with sources and a breakdown of which facts are corroborated and which are not necessarily trustworthy. This is meant to help me answer the all important question relative to the BCS-if what we know about the story represented everything the NCAA knew as well, would we rule Cam ineligible? I offer it here as quick view for others who might be interested in this well. Obviously I’m an Auburn fan but I’ve done my best to be objective and to minimize editorialized comments as much as possible so please realize that any omissions etc have come about honestly and I welcome corrections.

Timeline:
November-December 2009: Cam Newton was recruited by MSU, Auburn, and Oklahoma and he made official visits to each (Nov 28-MSU, Dec 11-OU, Dec 18-AU).

December 31, 2009: Cam publically committed to Auburn.

January-July 2010: MSU reported irregularities with Cam’s recruitment; The SEC requested additional information within days of receiving the news and made regular and repeated requests throughout the spring and summer though these requests went unheeded by MSU. MSU filed its initial response to the SEC’s inquiries in July.

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2...ewton_cas.html
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5786315
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5796839

November 4th, 2010: The NY Times and ESPN independently report that former MSU quarterback John Bond alleges he was approached by a former MSU player who solicited money in return for Cam’s commitment to MSU. Kenny Rogers is incorrectly identified as that player. Rogers initially denies involvement in a pay for play scheme. Cecil Newton denies any wrongdoing. Bond indicated that he informed the MSU athletic department then headed by Greg Byrnes upon being approached with the solicitation.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5765214
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/05/sp...burn.html?_r=2

November 5th, 2010: John Bond’s lawyer Phil Abernathy, states that John Bond never named Kenny Rogers as the player who approached Bond to either the NY Times nor ESPN. This is also corroborated by Bond in an interview with Buck and Kincaid at WCNN radio where Bond indicates that Kenny Rogers never asked him for money on Cam’s behalf suggesting there were two individuals between Bond and Rogers.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoot...n-newton-story
http://blogs.clarionledger.com/msu/2...n-allegations/

November 8th, 2010: Allegations that Cam cheated while at Florida are leaked by unnamed sources.

November 9th, 2010: Cam Newton publically denies wrongdoing in his recruitment. An unnamed source associated with Auburn indicated that Auburn University had not received a letter of inquiry from the NCAA concerning Cam’s recruitment and an audit of phone records spanning the months of Cam’s recruitment failed to turn up any evidence of contact between Rogers and Auburn University. Likewise Auburn had found no irregularities in either the Rogers’ family records or those of Cecil’s church. Bob Stoops commented upon OU’s recruitment of Cam saying OU was not approached about providing extra benefits in return for Cam’s commitment.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5783876

November 11-12th, 2010: Rogers does an interview with ESPN’s Ian Fitzsimmons. Rogers contradicts earlier statements and now admits he solicited money and claims to have acted on Cecil Newton’s behalf. Rogers provided some details about the solicitation of extra benefits indicating it would have taken between $100-180K to secure Cam’s commitment to MSU and Rogers said Cecil asked about payment while in a Starkville hotel room on Nov 27th with Rogers and two MSU coaches. He indicated that Bill Bell, another former MSU player, was the person that Rogers solicited for money. Rogers admitted he could recall no specific language regarding conversations where Cecil is alleged to have directed Rogers to solicit money on behalf of the Newtons. Separate reports also cited unnamed sources claiming that 1) Cecil told an unnamed MSU recruiter, “It would take more than a scholarship for Cam to go to MSU” and referred the recruiter to a third unnamed individual, and 2) another unnamed source said Cam called another unnamed MSU recruiter and expressed regret that he chose Auburn over MSU because “the money was too much”. MSU head coach Dan Mullen indicated that he and his assistants are the only persons on the bulldog staff who are registered with the NCAA as recruiters. SEC spokesman Charles Bloom indicated that there was no mention of conversations between MSU staffers and the Newtons concerning the solicitation of extra benefits in the reports that MSU filed with the SEC concerning the recruitment of Cam Newton. This was independently corroborated with the SEC office by a reporter for the AJC (Barnhart). The SEC indicated that MSU could offer no incriminating evidence concerning other institutions. This is eventually echoed by Rogers, Bond and Bell as well as each go on record indicating they have no knowledge of details concerning Auburn’s recruiting effort.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5786315
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5792707
http://blogs.ajc.com/barnhart-colleg...critical-mass/
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5796839

November 13th, 2010: WBTV out of Atlanta reports that an unnamed source close to the Newtons indicated that Cecil admitted having conversations with an ex MSU football player about money. No money was said to change hands and this was also said to have occurred without Cam’s knowledge.

http://www.wsbtv.com/sports/25778803/detail.html

November 16th, 2010: John Bond is interviewed by the FBI though the focus of their involvement is unclear.

November 17, 2010: TMZ reports on its website that the FBI has asked an unnamed individual connected with the Newton case if that person was familiar with Milton McGregor, an Auburn booster who is involved in a gambling/bribery scandal in Alabama.

http://www.tmz.com/2010/11/17/cam-ne...football-ncaa/

November 18th, 2010: Mark Schlabach of ESPN.com reports that Bill Bell was interviewed by the NCAA and discussed a text message that details a pay schedule (three payments over consecutive months comprised of $80K, $50K, and $50K). He also shared voice mail messages with the NCAA though it is unknown if Cecil’s voice is on them or if he participated. Bill Bell indicated that Cecil did not specifically ask for money during alleged conversations between Bell, Rogers and Cecil Newton. Bell does seem to indicate that Cecil and he talked about money in other undocumented conversations. The Birmingham news reported that wire taps of McGregor contain no conversations connecting him to Auburn’s recruitment of Cam Newton.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/s...r_espn_5818428
http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports...o-one/related/

November 19th, 2010: A lawyer for the Newtons denies that Cam ever took money or knew of any efforts to secure a pay for play arrangement. The NCAA President, Mark Emmert goes on record to address the standard that the NCAA applies when judging evidence in investigations of player eligibility saying, “"I want our people to be as efficient and expedited in the way they manage these things as possible, but at the same time, you've got to get the facts right. The burden of proof is higher than what it is for somebody who's writing in a blog,"

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...2c1d629b8bd95a
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5825694
http://wareagleextra.blogspot.com/20...#ixzz15j3mOpea

Summary:

At this time there have been no accusations against Auburn or against Cam and the NCAA is not investigating Auburn’s recruitment of Cam.

At this time, the alleged pay for play scheme does not appear to involve individuals acting in an official capacity for MSU.

Based upon both named and unnamed sources in the above narrative, here is the chain of individuals and the order of their connections regarding the alleged pay for play solicitation during MSU’s recruitment of Cam:

Cecil--------Rogers---------Bell----------Bond-----MSU AD-------NCAA

Given information that can be corroborated, the only thing we know with absolute certainty about these connections is that Rogers and Bell had detailed conversations about money because both have admitted to having such conversations.

Cecil has publicly denied that Rogers solicited money on his behalf both in person and through his lawyer. An uncorroborated secondhand source alleges Cecil admitted to having a conversation about money without Cam’s knowledge.

It does not appear that the relationship between the Newtons and Kenny Rogers was a strong one. Cecil and Rogers had never met in person before Cam’s visit to Starkville. Cecil has indicated that he had been contacted initially by Rogers when Cam was leaving U of F. Cecil has indicated that he called Rogers in late 2009 when MSU started recruiting Cam. Rogers is on record as indicating this phone call was about life in Starkville and MSU’s campus and program. In Roger’s Dallas radio interview, Rogers indicates that he met with Cecil on the 27th (the alleged hotel room meeting with MSU coaches) but did not interact with the Newtons during the 28th (Cam’s official visit) and thereafter only had significant contact with Cecil at a gas station as Cecil was leaving Starkville.

Apparently, MSU has reported no information regarding a solicitation of extra benefits by Cecil to MSU coaches contradicting Rogers’ account of the 27th meeting in a Starkville hotel room. This also calls into question the unnamed secondhand sources that claimed Cecil told an MSU recruiter it would take more than a scholarship and that Cam told an MSU recruiter that the money was too good. It would be a shady scenario for two coaches to meet a known player handler with a checkered past and the player’s father in a hotel room. Did the meeting happen? Maybe-maybe it’s even probable. But it seems unlikely that Rogers’ account is going to be corroborated by the two coaches if indeed they were present given the omission from MSU’s reports to the NCAA. It should be fairly easy for the NCAA to determine the identity of any coaches who were present on official recruiting business. Mullen has made it clear that only he and his coaches are officially allowed to recruit. At this time, it appears that any alleged conversations about extra benefits would have only occurred between individuals outside of MSU’s official recruiting efforts. Bond, the individual who initially reported irregularities to the MSU athletic department, was at least three degrees removed from any alleged conversation with Cecil about extra benefits. MSU continued to recruit Cam until he announced his commitment to Auburn despite information Bond provided to their athletic department.

Nothing in what we know from media accounts can directly tie Cecil to Bell with certainty. Rogers asserts a connection but the detailed pay for play text to Bell was sent to Bell from Rogers. Also that text no longer exists so the NCAA would have to rely only upon the word of Rogers and Bell regarding its contents. Bell has provided voicemails to the NCAA but it is unclear if Cecil’s voice is on them and Bell is on record as stating he never heard Cecil ask directly for money in alleged conversations between Bell, Rogers, and Cecil. Given that admission, it is unlikely that the voicemails will corroborate anything more than Rogers’ effort to solicit money through Bell.

At this point, there has been nothing credible to suggest Cam knew of Rogers’ efforts. There is only circumstantial evidence to link Cecil to such conversations and little of this evidence can be corroborated independently of the word of Rogers and Bell. Rogers has some major flags concerning credibility issues.

Concerning Auburn there has been nothing to implicate Auburn in any wrongdoing. Rich McGlynn, Auburn’s compliance officer, has a reputation of being hard-nosed concerning procedure in the mold of Slive. If the NCAA or Slive had indeed informed Auburn of specific facts that called Cam’s eligibility into question, it just isn’t likely that Auburn would play Cam. There would be no reason to the NCAA or the SEC to withhold such facts from Auburn especially given the NCAA is attempting a speedy resolution to this situation.

Clearly, the scandal brewing in the media raises the possibility that Cam’s eligibility could be affected. But Auburn’s recruitment of Cam appears to be legitimate at this point and the details of what may or may not have happened in Starkville are very murky with very few facts actually being corroborated. What in the above narrative suggests that it is obvious that Auburn should sit Cam and doing so would be fair to Cam or to Auburn?

Here is some editorializing: Auburn may be taking a bit of a risk by continuing to play Cam but frankly, and yes, I’m biased here, their defense of Cam is laudable and seems justified given what we know from media accounts of this currently all smoke and no fire saga.

[Brutus]

Cecil Newton admits to having discussions with the Mississippi State boosters about being paid to go there (though he's denying Cam's knowledge of the situation and that any money changed hands)...

Newton Admits Money Talks

This post is where Cecil admitted his comments. The story has since been changed, and now they're only using a "source" as his admission. But I assure you the original story contained a quote from Cecil hence the reason I phrased it as I did.

I posted that on Friday, November 12 and if you look at the top of the story, you'll see that it was listed as being "updated" 3 days later. Someone must have raised a ruckus because the quote from Cecil was removed.

[jojo]

http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles...-the-real-beef

[Brutus]

http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles...-the-real-beef

Instant credibility is lost when someone ever cites a bleacher report article. Ever.

It's ironic, actually. That article is talking about people believing things for a lack of evidence, yet, bleacher report leads the internets in exaggerated, misleading and usually flat out false stories. This was the same story that said the Reds were trading Chris Heisey for Carlos Marmol.

[jojo]

Instant credibility is lost when someone ever cites a bleacher report article. Ever.

It was posted because of the argument the author made. Where was the argument flawed?

[Brutus]

It was posted because of the argument the author made. Where was the argument flawed?

There has already been 'evidence' and even a direct quote from the father. You may not like to hear it, thereby you're dismissing it, but we're past the stage of having to make giant assumptions.

A little speculation is fair game this far along in the storyline.

In other words, the article has little or no merit. It's an Auburn fan simply upset that the attention has been taken away from a potentially historic season at Auburn.

[jojo]

There has not been a direct quote from Cecil and since that innaccuracy has been clearly pointed out, you really should quit repeating it as truth. Cecil has denied the allegations both directly and through his lawyer.

Concerning the evidence for your conclusion, what is the compelling evidence forming such a solid case for the conclusion of guilt? I've went out of my way to wallow in the minutiae of this story in order to inform my opinion, so Its not likely ive missed something and certainly, nothing has been purposefully ignored as seems to be suggested above. We're past the point of ignoring the devil in the details and simply assuming facts.

Btw, assuming Cam was paid to commit to Auburn, the NCAA will declare Cam ineligible for the season, and Auburns season will be vacated isn't the same thing as a little speculation.....

[Brutus]

There has not been a direct quote from Cecil and since that innaccuracy has been clearly pointed out, you really should quit repeating it as truth. Cecil has denied the allegations both directly and through his lawyer.

Concerning the evidence for your conclusion, what is the compelling evidence forming such a solid case for the conclusion of guilt? I've went out of my way to wallow in the minutiae of this story in order to inform my opinion, so Its not likely ive missed something and certainly, nothing has been purposefully ignored as seems to be suggested above. We're past the point of ignoring the devil in the details and simply assuming facts.

Btw, assuming Cam was paid to commit to Auburn, the NCAA will declare Cam ineligible for the season, and Auburns season will be vacated isn't the same thing as a little speculation.....

It's not an inaccuracy. It was in the article I posted. The quote must have been removed when the story was updated. Regardless, I still think you're wholheartedly denying yourself of a lot of things on this story.

[jojo]

It's not an inaccuracy. It was in the article I posted. The quote must have been removed when the story was last updated a few days later, but it absolutely was there and others saw it. I'm sure there are other people here that can attest the quote existed. Just because you didn't see it doesn't mean it didn't get published. It absolutely, positively was there. I've shown the link and shown the update. Your refusal to believe it is the only inaccuracy.

Frankly I'm at a loss concerning your stance on this. But here's a question... If a news agency attributed a direct quote to a primary individual that spoke to the essence of the story, why would it be replaced by much weaker evidence?

FWIW, I remember the initial story attributing the comment indirectly as told to a family acquaintance. In any event, the contents of an initial version of a story are immaterial when replaced by more accurate versions.

[jojo]

Regardless, I still think you're wholheartedly denying yourself of a lot of things on this story.

Like what specifically?

[Brutus]

Frankly I'm at a loss concerning your stance on this. But here's a question... If a news agency attributed a direct quote to a primary individual that spoke to the essence of the story, why would it be replaced by much weaker evidence?

FWIW, I remember the initial story attributing the comment indirectly as told to a family acquaintance. In any event, the contents of an initial version of a story are immaterial when replaced by more accurate versions.

Working in the media, it's actually very easy to see why it would be edited. I myself have quoted people and several times they've called and asked to have certain quotes removed from a story because they had a change of heart being on the record or having certain portions on the record. And I've never had a story as sensitive as this one.

I could very, very, very easily see Cecil having said something on the record, and on the advice of an attorney, asked to be taken off the record about it. It certainly makes sense considering the tone of how they're sourcing the admission by Cecil.

Heck, I once had a coach of an institution call me begging to have one quote taken from a story by a recruit that said something that made his school look bad. These things have a tendency to look and feel a little different to the speaking parties after their words are seen in print.

[jojo]

Working in the media, it's actually very easy to see why it would be edited. I myself have quoted people and several times they've called and asked to have certain quotes removed from a story because they had a change of heart being on the record or having certain portions on the record. And I've never had a story as sensitive as this one.

I could very, very, very easily see Cecil having said something on the record, and on the advice of an attorney, asked to be taken off the record about it. It certainly makes sense considering the tone of how they're sourcing the admission by Cecil.

Heck, I once had a coach of an institution call me begging to have one quote taken from a story by a recruit that said something that made his school look bad. These things have a tendency to look and feel a little different to the speaking parties after their words are seen in print.

You're arguing that Cecil made a mea culpa to wsbtv then asked them to remove his quote? WSBTV then decided to do so and completely changed the tenor of the original story by attributing the comments to some nondescript source instead?

Again, I recall the original story attributing the comments indirectly via an unnamed source.

This link from the 12th confirms:

http://college-football.blogs.cbsspo...56338/25807185

If anyone was going to milk a direct Cecil quote, it would be tigerdroppings but here is their post from the 12th:

http://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/m...asp?p=22689186

I'd propose that any conclusion based upon the belief that a direct quote from Cecil was given to wsbtv for their story be revisited and revised.

[Brutus]

I don't know what transpired after the fact, but I'm not going to bother.

I feel confident this story has legs. I'm done debating with someone that clearly has let a personal emotional investment get in the way. You're one of my favorite posters here, and that won't change. But on this topic, I think your allegiance is blinding.

[jojo]

I don't know what transpired after the fact, but I'm not going to bother.

I feel confident this story has legs. I'm done debating with someone that clearly has let a personal emotional investment get in the way. You're one of my favorite posters here, and that won't change. But on this topic, I think your allegiance is blinding.

Brutus, with all due respect, I'm not struggling with a preconceived bias on this issue.

[MWM]

jojo, you're approaching this topic as a defense attorney would approach defending their client. Nothing wrong with that given your relationship with Auburn. But I doubt anyone is buying that you're not approaching this with bias line.