Hello, Mr Anonymous

Remember back at the beginning of the season when the Cam Newton investigation was going on and nobody cared?

But when Auburn started gathering wins and Newton started blowing apart defenses to become the leading Heisman candidate, the rioting began.

To think this all started from an "anonymous" source for ESPN.com Cam Newton and his dad asked for money to play for Miss State and when it didn't work out, they went to Auburn. And before he left Cam called an "anonymous" coach at Miss State and said "the money was too good"

Hmmm... too bad the NCAA, SEC and FBI couldn't uncover anything like that. They would have rendered Cam ineligible for sure! Too bad all the sources crucial to ESPN.com's story were "anonymous" or this would have put Auburn and Cam in deep trouble.

Oh wait... Auburn and Cam have been cleared, rats! Sucks when you make a story up and have no witness's to show for it.

Wait!! I forgot! What about John Bond!! Yeah! ESPN.com did mention his name in their "report"

Oh wait... I remember, the day after ESPN.com broke the story, Mr Bond was quick to jump on radio station WCNN in Atlanta during the "Buck and Kincade" show to say that ESPN.com GREATLY mis-quoted him in their report.

In fact his attorney Phil Abernathy said that if someone tried to bring ESPN.com's "anonymous" allegations to court that they would be "thrown out in a hail of laughter, due to their gross inaccuracies"

Before I go further I want you to know I don't fault the media for keeping sources anonymous to protect them, it's just when EVERY other source seems to come from an "anonymous" person and that's when you should get a little suspicious.

In fact, Greg Doyle from CBS and Mike Pesca from NPR both seem to agree that ESPN.com's "chicken little" allegations are a prime example of "journalism malpractice" When all you have is "hear-say" and "gossip" it's kinda hard to believe. Just ask the magazine paper that reports Elvis is now living on Mars as an alien warlord, and they'll tell you they had "anonymous" sources as well.

And let's stop quoting "anonymous" coaches and go with some REAL coaches in college football.

How bout the 2 coaches who should hate Auburn the most? Alabama and South Carolina (who play Auburn this week in the SEC Championship) Surely they were outraged by the Cam Newton decision??

Go ahead... Google it.... I'll wait....

...... done? Look's like both Nick Saban and Steve Spurrier didn't have a problem, did they? In fact, sounds like they were in favor of the decision doesn't it? Hmmm... sure beats the opinions of the coaches from Anonymous U!

But the torches are still burning and the pitchforks remain in the air. Everyone wanted a witch hunt and now they're upset there no witch to be found. I know the average hater (let's call them villagers now) is really feeling bummed. Here they wasted all their time looking to "kill the witch" but the judge and jury has deemed Cam "clean".... "Aw man! I just BOUGHT this pitchfork! And they don't give refunds!"

Why not look towards Justin Brant? The Director of Crimson Tide Productions who approved of the taunting songs the (now fired) DJ played during Cam Newton's practice last Saturday?

Nah, that's not important... ok, how about the fact Florida is now being investigated for a Federal crime in leaking Cam's school record? Ouch! That's gotta hurt!

Eh, to be honest, neither of those stories interest me either, so let's see... AHA!! CAM NEWTON IS IN VIOLATION OF SEC BYLAWS!!! YES!! YES!!! I GOT IT!!

Let's see here... section 14.01.3.2 right? He violated it!! INELIGIBLE! INELIGIBLE!!

Oh wait... let me read more...

Section 4.4.2 (b)

The Commissioner shall have jurisdiction on all questions of student eligibility for intercollegiate athletic competition and may appoint an advisory committee on eligibility and infractions and base actions on consultations with this committee.

or how bout Section 19.10.3.4

The Commissioner has the duty and power to investigate the validity of violations and impose their penalties and sanctions against member institutions, their athletic staff members or student athletes, for practices and conduct which violate the spirit, as well as the letter of the NCAA and SEC rules and regulations. This shall include the ability to render prospective student athletes or current student athletes ineligible for competition due to their involvement in a violation of NCAA or SEC rules that occur during the individual's recruitment.

So what did SEC Commissioner Mike Slive do about that? He followed the rules. With the assistance of a lawyer and a former judge they reviewed section 14.01.3.2, specifically the phrase "receives or agrees to receive" and what do you think they had to say?

"You could read this bylaw expansively to conclude that an athlete is ineligible at all institutions for receiving a hamburger. I did not believe and do not believe that was the intent of the rule." - Mike Slive

Good thinking Mike, too bad the villagers don't agree with that statement. Or the SEC bylaws quoted above. Hmmm.... think the villagers even KNEW those SEC bylaws about the Commissioner? Doubtful.

"I had to determine what the appropriate league response was after balancing all of these factors and after considering all of that I did not believe that he had violated our bylaws." - Mike Slive

But here's another take on it by SEC spokesman Charles Bloom:

“It only applies when there is an actual payment of an improper benefit, or an agreement (such as a handshake agreement) to pay and receive an improper benefit. The facts in this case, as we understand them, are that the
student-athlete’s father, without the knowledge of the student-athlete, solicited improper payments (which were rejected) from an institution the young man did not attend, and that the institution where the young man is enrolled was not involved.”

Excuse me Mr Villager, your torch just went out.

Now let's be serious, do you actually believe the NCAA would pass judgment so lightly? Just because the call doesn't go your way doesn't mean it's all a big conspiracy, it means ESPN.com and other media outlets that fed the fuel on this whole story were wrong.

al.com's Kevin Scarbinsky said it best:

"Any evidence would have rendered Cam ineligible for good and the NCAA searched hard."

"Ok" says the villager, moving closer to the fire to re-light his torch, "but this has opened up a HUGE loophole in the system!"

Not really. A huge loophole existed already. Both the NCAA and the SEC admit it. Let's look at this from a different angle.. imagine this...

Cam had no knowledge of his father's dealings at Miss State but is deemed ineligible by the NCAA and the SEC.

Villagers around the world rejoice.

Silly villagers.

Now here's a situation: Let's say the following year my brother is a star quarterback in high school who's taking the step to college. He's decided to go Florida but hasn't committed yet. I know where he wants to go and try to solicit money from the college behind his back. If I succeed, cash money for me. If not? Oh well, no skin off my back.

My brother never knew about it but BOOM he's ineligible to play for the school. See where I'm going with this? This makes it so that EVERY college football player can be ruled ineligible for something they had no knowledge or control of. THAT'S a can of worms!

So for now the NCAA and SEC will look into their bylaws for the future. (good luck figuring that one out) The investigation is still ongoing as it should be. The NCAA needs to continue to be thorough in their investigation.

As for Cam? He'll be allowed to compete in the final 2 games of the season, receive a written apology from ESPN.com for making up phone call stories, Cam will win the Heisman, come back a second season and do it all over again with Auburn.

How do I know all this?...... An anonymous source told me.