Proving Cameron Newton and Auburn Are Dirty: Tigers, Bulldogs and Gators, Oh My!

The ongoing saga of Cam Newton and his eligibility continues to generate a great deal of smoke and, according to some new reports, the flickering of actual flames may actually be visible.  But is that really the case?

Recent Developments

We are told there are text messages and voice mails implicating Cam's father, Cecil, but to date none have been released.  We have been informed that a “source close to the Newton family” reports Cecil Newton admitted to a play-to-pay negotiation, but we don’t really know whether that source really even has access to the Newton family, much less proof that any such conversation took place.

The FBI is certainly somehow involved but the reasons why remain unknown and the Bureau is not commenting, so how that impacts on the Newton matter is also just a matter of speculation.

What Do We Know? 

Despite early denials, Kenny Rogers has confessed to serving as a conduit between Mississippi State booster Bill Bell and allegedly Cecil Newton in November 2009.  Bell admits to being contacted by Rogers, who claimed to be operating on behalf of the Newtons.  Former Bulldogs quarterback John Bond say he too was contacted by Rogers but there have been several conflicting stories about that.

The Bulldogs did turn in a report to the conference but it was several weeks after the alleged conversations, and MSU is the only school claiming to have been contacted by the Newtons.  At least two other schools in addition to Auburn have denied on the record any untoward contacts or financial discussions. 

We also know that Mississippi State continued to recruit Cam Newton after the alleged pay-for-play conversations up until he verbally committed to Auburn a month later and evidently did not turn the matter over to the NCAA until January 2010.

We know via the SEC that follow-up reports did not arrive at the conference from MSU until nearly six months later and that there was no mention of any phone conversations involving pay-to-play negotiations or Cam Newton’s regrets about selecting Auburn over Mississippi State.

The Newtons have been contacted by the NCAA to provide financial paperwork as well as investigative interviews.  We are also aware they have retained an attorney, which makes sense given the circumstances.

We know that Auburn continues to deem Cam Newton eligible to play.

What We Don’t Know

Frankly, we don’t know a lot.  There are enough holes to drive even the Akron Zips running game through.  

Bond, Rogers and Bell can’t get their stories straight, and it appears that the only person in alleged direct contact with the Newtons is Rogers, whose initial denials make his credibility extremely suspect.  People keep promising proof in the form of texts or recordings, but to date none have been provided. 

Clearly the reporters trust their sources (see Jeremy Schapp’s article on the subject) but reporters are not always right and their sources are not always correct either.  Mistakes happen and information is misread.   If all a reporter has is anonymous sourcing without any corroborating documentation to prove or reinforce their assertion, then the reporter is treading a fine ethical line. 

It is assuming much if reporters expect the public to simply accept that the story is factual despite lacking hard proof based solely on their own reputation of integrity.

Nor does it make sense that all of these reporters are sitting on information that is a “smoking gun” while the story plays out.  After all, do they not run the risk of being scooped by a latecomer to this debacle?  If any reporter had hard proof of misconduct, it is difficult to imagine why it has not yet been published.

We don’t know the credibility of some of the players we know.  Clearly Cecil Newton’s character is subject to question but so too is that of Rogers, who first stated he knew nothing about the matter and a week later remembered plenty of specific details except for those related to actual conversations.

Bell is questionable too, if only because he allowed himself to get drawn into this mess.  Also, he claims to have spoken with Newton while Rogers says he was the go-between in the conversations allegedly taking place between Cecil Newton and Bell.

The failure of Bonds and MSU to include the two telephone conversations in their report to the SEC raises credibility questions for them as well.

What Would Constitute Proof?

The best proof would be a taped or sworn confession by Cecil Newton that could be authenticated as genuine.

More damning still would be proof of a money trail demonstrating actual payments made documenting their point of origin and eventual destination.

Failing that, adequate proof may come in the form of a verified audio or videotape with clear statements of intent or negotiations that cannot be construed in any other fashion.  Making someone smile is not sufficient.  We need to hear dollars and terms being unambiguously discussed with Cecil Newton being actually present.

Text messages that can be proven to have originated from Cecil Newton’s phone and clearly part of a financial transaction would be helpful as well.  Legally, Newton could claim his phone had been cloned but the damage would still be severe.  The same goes for voice mail.

Proof need not reach the level of authenticity required by a court, but it should still be clear enough that any reasonable person, including Auburn fans, must conclude there was wrongdoing at some level.  Merely making more accusations does not qualify as any form of evidence.

Potential Outcomes

In the event that some proof is finally offered that might actually be persuasive, the outcome remains still in doubt.

To this point, Auburn stands accused of nothing, although by playing Newton in the face of the NCAA “informal” investigation the school risks damage anyway.  If proof is found Auburn paid money to recruit Newton, the resulting sanctions will make for a bleak future on the plains.

If Auburn is absolved of any wrongdoing, save possibly playing an ineligible player, they stand to forfeit the games of this remarkable season, but any further major sanctions would seem unlikely.  The Tigers did their diligence and the NCAA cleared Newton to play for them before the season began even though these accusations were known when Auburn signed him, so additional sanctions seem unlikely. 

It is equally possible that a fine reading of the NCAA and SEC rules on this matter will generate a lot of anger but no sanctions against Auburn or even Cam Newton, as there is a very real interpretive question to be answered even if Cecil Newton’s guilt happens to be established.  If so, expect changes in those same rules in the very near future in order to avoid a similar mess in another season.

Auburn and Cam Newton may or may not be punished by the NCAA, but they are not alone in the cross hairs.  There are very real questions as to how MSU handled this matter, including why certain details were not submitted as well as the general delay in processing.  The fact that Bell has been involved is also an NCAA red flag.

Florida is in peril if only because it has a leak in its office that violates federal privacy laws.  We will never know for sure whether Cam Newton did cheat while playing for the Gators, as it never went before the honor committee, so no finding of fact was made.  If he did, Florida faces potential NCAA sanction and if he did not, then the Florida source lied.  Neither is a good outcome.

The SEC is tarnished regardless of the outcome.  Whether there really is anything of this consequence to this story, the reputation of the Southeastern Conference will be a long time in putting this behind them.  Auburn’s decision to play Newton was based on the lack of any compelling evidence that recommended more caution, but the result is still that the SEC appears to be in a win-at-all-costs mode. 

Mississippi State's ham-fisted efforts at reporting the alleged infractions also gives the conference a black eye.  Florida’s inability to control privileged information blackens the other eye.

Conclusions

Like the paranoid grassy knoll kooks, there will always be some who feel that Cam Newton and Auburn cheated regardless of what the eventual evidence suggests.  There will also be Auburn fans and others who will forever associate this matter with an unsubstantiated media witch hunt.   

An ultimate and satisfying solution is not likely in the cards.  The question is whether the solution achieved will be based on a just examination of provable facts or a general fear that someone MIGHT be getting over on the system?

Much of the discussion has devolved into a debate about whether to pay athletes or re-examine the role of agents, but all of that is a red herring.  The real question is whether the NCAA will succumb to external pressure and fear by acting prematurely or diligently complete their investigation into the facts of the matter (as opposed to a blizzard of speculation, innuendo and second-hand claims) before deciding how to proceed. 

The next question—if sufficient proof has been discovered to raise a serious compliance concern—will be how the NCAA interprets its rules and whether it will proceed by the letter of the by-laws or its perceived intent.  Regardless, expect changes in those same rules by the NCAA if only to prevent this particular set of circumstances from surfacing again.

Auburn fans would do well not to be dismissive of the potential for disaster in this mess.  It is very real and the fallout may be severe.  However, those who are certain that Newton will be declared ineligible and the Auburn University will be punished with sweeping sanctions may wish to dampen their expectations as well, because those outcomes are not nearly as graven in stone either.

Prudent people will wait and see what develops and withhold judgments until the NCAA releases the results of their investigation.