help me understand

[kchusker_chris]

In an e-mail to the AP, NCAA spokesman Stacy Osborn wrote that "solicitation of cash or benefits by a prospective student-athlete or another individual'' could either be a secondary or major violation depending on the specific situation. She also wrote that "the school must make the determination whether a student-athlete is ineligible. Once they do so, they could request reinstatement from the NCAA on behalf of the student-athlete.''

So, if punishment is to be handed out...Auburn has to punish themselves - then ask the NCAA to reverse the decision they just made. WTH? Crap like this is why half the roster of places like USC/Oregon/UCLA/Texas are on the payroll. Won't be long before every trophy/MNC will have an asterick next to it.

 

[NUance]

Where did you run across this anyway?

 

[HuskerNMO]

In an e-mail to the AP, NCAA spokesman Stacy Osborn wrote that "solicitation of cash or benefits by a prospective student-athlete or another individual'' could either be a secondary or major violation depending on the specific situation. She also wrote that "the school must make the determination whether a student-athlete is ineligible. Once they do so, they could request reinstatement from the NCAA on behalf of the student-athlete.''

So, if punishment is to be handed out...Auburn has to punish themselves - then ask the NCAA to reverse the decision they just made. WTH? Crap like this is why half the roster of places like USC/Oregon/UCLA/Texas are on the payroll. Won't be long before every trophy/MNC will have an asterick next to it.

I don't think you quite get it. If a student asks for, or gets cash or benefits, the school has to label the student athlete ineligible. If the school thinks the player should get a second chance, they can ask the NCAA to restore the athlete's ineligibility which usually entails the student repaying the benefit and then serving a suspension at some time. See AJ Green and Macel Dareous earlier this year.

Those sentences need to stand on their own.

If a player takes benefits, depending on what the school knew, and the amount, they could be hit with a secondary or major violation.

Now a different subject, if a player took benefits, the school must report it and deem the player ineligible (benefits = loss of amature status), they then have to ask the NCAA to reinstate their eligibility or amature status.

That doesn't mean that the NCAA can't find out on it's own and punish a player.

 

[kchusker_chris]

It came from SI.com. Thanks jliehr - makes sense in a backwards sort of way. Sounds to me like it will be easier (and almost encouraged) for Auburn to just try and ride it out through January while they "investigate". They'll still be able to collect their nice chunk of BCS $$ and everything that goes w/ being a MNC even if it's taken away. Suspend him now and the MNC becomes all but impossible.

 

[HuskerNMO]

It came from SI.com. Thanks jliehr - makes sense in a backwards sort of way. Sounds to me like it will be easier (and almost encouraged) for Auburn to just try and ride it out through January while they "investigate". They'll still be able to collect their nice chunk of BCS $$ and everything that goes w/ being a MNC even if it's taken away. Suspend him now and the MNC becomes all but impossible.

It is interesting, I think with all the distractions Auburn is going to take care of this by losing anyway :w00t