Cam Newton: Should Newton and Auburn Be Punished Like Reggie Bush and USC?
Cam Newton has officially been ruled eligible by the NCAA after the investigation that threatened to ruin his college football career found no wrongdoing on his part.
The investigation into an alleged pay-for-play scheme orchestrated by Newton's father, Cecil, has clouded the college football landscape all season.
So does this mean it's over now? Not by a long shot.
We all know that Cam Newton's name will appear in the headlines as long as he's at Auburn, and even when he moves on to the NFL.
But as of now, Newton is free to compete and most importantly, help his team try to win a national championship.
The question I'm here to discuss is whether Newton and Auburn should be punished like Reggie Bush and USC?
Let's debate.
5. Yes: The NCAA Needs More Sacrificial Lambs
1 of 11
You and I both know that this isn't the first time anyone's heard the words "college football player" and "money" in the same sentence.
There are players across the country who are doing/receiving things they shouldn't be just so they can play for a top-notch program.
Now, Reggie Bush is clearly the most notable name to be punished by the NCAA for breaking NCAA bylaws.
He was the first sacrificial lamb, if you will.
But still, that hasn't prevented schools across the country from giving players some extra cash underneath the table.
If Cam Newton becomes the second sacrificial lamb for the NCAA—because he does have some indirect involvement at the very least—maybe this will prevent more scenarios like this from happening in the future.
5. No: The Investigation Isn't Over Yet
2 of 11
Yes, Cam Newton has been ruled eligible...for now.
But the investigation isn't simply going to abruptly end and never be spoken of again.
Despite what the phrase "Cam Newton ruled eligible" leads some people to believe, he's not in the clear just yet.
So he's not going to be punished at this point because all the facts haven't been gathered.
Until that happens, Newton and Auburn should not and will not receive any type of harsh punishment.
4. Yes: Reggie Bush Was Punished for His Parents' Actions
3 of 11
In Reggie Bush's case, USC's program was retroactively hit with some tough sanctions.
The Trojans received a two-year bowl ban and a reduction in scholarships that caused them to lose recruits and even some players who had already been there for multiple years.
And part of the reason why USC was given such a harsh punishment was because Bush's parents were found to have received improper benefits during his time at the school.
If Bush and USC can be punished for actions involving Bush's parents, then so can Newton and Auburn.
.jpg?w=256 "Ohio State Team Doctor")
4. No: The System Is the Problem
4 of 11
It's not the players that are the problem, it's the system.
College sports, especially football, aren't treated much different from professional sports these days.
There are only slight differences, like instead of signing free agent contracts, prep athletes sign letters of intent.
And as much as some people don't want to believe it, there's still money involved in college sports that isn't just for tuition or books.
It's for partying and "work."
The entire system of college athletics and recruiting is flawed, and Cam Newton is just the latest example.
3. Yes: He's Knows What Was Going On
5 of 11
I don't have any proof that Cam Newton was aware of his father's actions nor am I willing to definitively say he knew what was going on.
But, let's be honest: is anyone that naive?
Newton has to be more clueless than Alicia Silverstone to have "no idea" what Cecil Newton did during the recruiting process.
Like I said, I won't argue that Cam Newton undoubtedly knew his father was seeking money for his signature on a national letter of intent.
But I will say that I don't know many people who would be completely unaware of such a major occurrence.
Because if something looks, sounds, seems and feels like it's shady, then it probably is.
3. No: There's No Evidence That Money Exchanged Hands
6 of 11
We do have a pretty clear understanding that Cecil Newton, along with the owner of a scouting service, sought funds for Cam Newton's commitment.
But what no one has is concrete proof that money ever actually changed hands.
Did Cecil Newton receive any, or all, of the $180,000 he was seeking? Nothing points to that.
Did Auburn dish out gifts or monetary compensation to Cam Newton? Not that we know of.
So this is unlike the Reggie Bush case, in which actual money was transferred from the university to the parents.
Therefore, these two situations are more different than you might think.
2. Yes: Not Punishing Them Sets a Bad Precedent
7 of 11
When asked about the situation, ESPN's Brock Huard brought up a very interesting point: the possibility of a slippery slope.
"Cam Newton’s dad is not alone in this process, he’s not the lone wolf out there who has an unbelievable talent with a son," Huard said. "That sets a very dangerous precedent.”
If Cam Newton and Auburn don't receive any type of punishment in this situation, what's to prevent parents from doing similar things in the future?
As long as it doesn't affect their son's playing status or eligibility, there's not much else they'll worry about.
2. No: Cam Newton Wasn't Directly Involved That We Know Of
8 of 11
According to ESPN, this is what the NCAA said about Cam Newton's eligibility:
"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," said Kevin Lennon, NCAA vice president for academic and membership affairs.
That seems pretty simple enough.
The NCAA did not find enough proof to pin this debacle on the shoulders of Auburn or Newton himself.
In that case, there is nothing that merits any type of USC or Reggie Bush treatment on the school or the player.
1. Yes: The Rules Were Broken
9 of 11
Don't take it from me. Take it from Section 14.01.3.2 of the SEC bylaws.
Note: Pay particular attention to the bolded parts.
“If at any time before or after matriculation in a member institution a student-athlete or any member of his/her family receives or agrees to receive, directly or indirectly, any aid or assistance beyond or in addition to that permitted by the Bylaws of this Conference (except such aid or assistance as such student-athlete may receive from those persons on whom the student is naturally or legally dependent for support), such student- athlete shall be ineligible for competition in any intercollegiate sport within the Conference for the remainder of his/her college career.”
Is it just me, or doesn't Cam Newton clearly fall under that category?
1. No: Cecil Newton Is Responsible for the Mess
10 of 11
Cecil Newton may have thought he was doing what was best for his son in this situation.
Though he clearly showed bad judgment with his pay-for-play scheme, one of his main goals was to find a suitable school for his son.
But the ends don't always justify the means.
It was Cecil Newton who sought money for Cam Newton's signature on a letter of intent. It was Cecil Newton who jeopardized his son's college football career.
It was Cecil Newton who shed a negative light on the NCAA, the SEC, Auburn and even his son.
He is the real culprit here.
The Verdict: Should Newton and Auburn Be Treated Like USC and Reggie Bush?
11 of 11
This certainly isn't the last we've heard of this story. There are just too many questions and not enough answers at this point.
But two things that we do know should take priority above all else.
One, there's been no evidence that proves Auburn paid money for Cam Newton's signature. And two, Cecil Newton is the only one who definitely committed any type of wrongdoing.
In that case, it's too early to enforce some over-the-top punishments on Auburn and Newton when the whole story isn't out yet.
The conclusion is simple: we just need more time.
The Verdict: No. We don't have enough information yet.
.jpg?w=480 "Ohio State Team Doctor")
