Emmett Brown;552450 wrote:I think when he said this he was referring to cheating at Florida and not taking money.

I'm not going to confirm nor deny nothing that has been taking place. I've answered what I need to answer. If they're out there, go with it and make the decision or determination based on whatever you've got to say.

vball10set;552490 wrote:watching Cam's presser when he said he "wasn't going to address these non-issues" and didn't deny the allegations reminded me a lot of Mark McGwire at the senate hearings...avoid the question and hope it goes away :rolleyes:

krambman;552556 wrote:I thought that it sounded a lot like Reggie Bush when he returned his Heisman, saying that it was out of respect for the Heisman Trophy, but that it wasn't an admission of guilt.

jordo212000;552579 wrote:An interesting thought for pollsters could be this hypothetical... (this hypothetical depends on the NCAA acting quickly). What if Auburn makes the Nat'l Championship, but a week before the game Newton is found ineligible. Now we have a championship with a backup QB in which the other team probably knocks the crap out of them. My thought is this, I wonder how many pollsters will simply vote Auburn 3rd or 4th so that they can avoid any chance of that happening

thedynasty1998;552621 wrote:Absolutely no way Auburn suspends Newton. What do they suspend him for? Accepting money. Well then they are screwed.

dat dude;552630 wrote:Lotz said NCAA to suspend, not Auburn. Big difference.

WebFire;552395 wrote:What if they didn't award him the Heisman, and didn't let Auburn play for the NC, and the find out this stuff isn't true?

Tough situation. Innocent until proven guilty?

karen lotz;552654 wrote:Well supposedly they have been investigating since January. Although the NCAA doesn't have any incident report paperwork filed. The whole situation is just odd.


And just to say it again, the suspension rumor was the result of some writer taking a quote waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay out of context and running with it.

centralbucksfan;552741 wrote:Per Stewart Mandel on cnnsi.com:

"The SEC was supposedly made aware of this information back in January, and it's hard to imagine the league didn't pass it along to the NCAA. If it didn't, you better believe the NCAA is looking into it now. Suddenly, this is shaping up to be the biggest pay-for-play scandal since I've been covering this beat"

Hmmm, any chance the SEC didn't notify the NCAA when they got word of it last Jan??

Terry_Tate;552743 wrote:Another interesting thing is LSU is sitting at 8-1 with their only loss to Auburn. If the Auburn games are forfeited with an ineligible player does LSU essentially take Auburn's spot since they would be undefeated with that loss taken away, even though they lost it on the field? Just another thing to think about in all of the craziness.

Fly4Fun;552746 wrote:I think the most interesting/troubling situation would be after the NCG and all the bowls having been selected... and just after Christmas (Before the big bowls get going) it comes out that the accusations are true, he is ineligible and Auburn has to vacate the victories and everything.

What would the NCAA/BCS do?

Would they rearrange the bowls to get a new team into the NCG? If so then one of the bowls would be missing a team? Just not have that bowl play? What about that team's opponent?

OR

Kick Auburn out of the NCG... bump them to the lowest bowl yet to be played (so everyone still has a game to play). And bump everyone else up a slot and re-slot the remaining bowls accordingly?

OR

If you let Auburn play in the NCG that would be absolutely miserable. What would the ratings be knowing it really is nothing more than an exhibition game because Auburn can't win?