Blog Entry

NCAA investigation of Auburn isn't over

Posted on: July 13, 2011 8:32 pm
 
Posted by Tom Fornelli

If you thought that the NCAA's investigation of Auburn and its recruitment of Cam Newton was over, then it seems you'd be wrong. At least, that's the impression NCAA Vice President of Enforcement Julie Roe Lach gave Auburn head coach Gene Chizik last month. That's when football and basketball coaches from the SEC were in Destin, Florida where Lach made a presentation to the group.

According to a report in the New York Times, after Lach opened up her presentation for discussion, Chizik had quite a few questions for her and then she dropped a bombshell on him.
[Chizik] peppered Roe Lach with a flurry of questions about the N.C.A.A.’s investigation into Cam Newton and why the N.C.A.A. had not publicly announced that the investigation was over. Chizik complained that the inquiry’s open-ended nature had hurt Auburn’s recruiting and he followed up at least three times, leading to a testy exchange.

“You’ll know when we’re finished,” Roe Lach told Chizik, according to several coaches who were at the meeting. “And we’re not finished.”
Well then!

While neither the NCAA or Auburn would confirm the exchange between Chizik and Roe Lach, according to the New York Times report, four fellow SEC basketball coaches -- Vanderbilt's Kevin Stallings, Arkansas' Mike Anderson, LSU's Trent Johnson and Ole Miss' Andy Kennedy -- did confirm the exchange to the paper.

Of course, just because the investigation isn't over, that doesn't mean the NCAA is going to find any new evidence than what it has already and use it to punish Auburn. Still, the fact that the NCAA is still digging around can't be all that comforting for Auburn faithful.


Comments

Since: Aug 10, 2006
Posted on: July 15, 2011 3:40 pm
 

NCAA investigation of Auburn isn't over

bump



Since: Aug 10, 2006
Posted on: July 15, 2011 3:39 pm
 

NCAA investigation of Auburn isn't over

bump



Since: Aug 10, 2006
Posted on: July 15, 2011 3:39 pm
 

NCAA investigation of Auburn isn't over

Get that off the screen.  Statistics messed up page.  Bump it off



Since: Aug 10, 2006
Posted on: July 15, 2011 3:39 pm
 

NCAA investigation of Auburn isn't over

Get that off the screen



Since: Jan 17, 2008
Posted on: July 15, 2011 3:35 pm
 

NCAA investigation of Auburn isn't over

Spare me the drama.  Because I mentioned the church, rightly or wrongly, does not mean you get to throw out all of my other points.  For the sake of argument, let's completely ignore the church aspect.  Cecil Newton propositioning Mississippi St is enough to warrant investigating any school Cam signed with.


Correct.  And they have.  Auburn has never been sent an official letter of inquiry. 



Are you trying to say that because there is no letter of inquiry, then there is not an NCAA investigation?  If Auburn has never been sent an official LOI, then why does Chizik have a burr under his saddle?  Why would he be pissy about the NCAA not closing an investigation that does not exist?  And why would the NCAA rep get irritatied by his badgering and state in no uncertain terms that the investigation is still open and active?  Somebody is confused.



Since: Aug 10, 2006
Posted on: July 15, 2011 3:28 pm
 

NCAA investigation of Auburn isn't over

@rebels

I am sorry I am just not sure what you are wanting me to own up to.  I have been very consistent in what my opinion was, and that is that I simply do not know all the facts, and therefore, can only assume that because Auburn chose to go with the reinstatement process, that either we felt confident there was nothing there, or that the NCAA would never find anything.  It doesn't matter if I, or other Auburn fans, or the entire country knew that the reinstatement process had no investigative facts and only facts from Auburn.  That still doesn't change Auburn's intent, which was we were confident nothing was there and normally that stuff is given from inside sources.  Why exatcly is that such an important piece of information for you?  You suffer from this delusion that just because an investigation is open, not open, in limbo, unclear, whatever, that it should increase my worry or make me feel different or uncomfortable.  My answer is no.  I feel the same way I did six months ago.  This article means nothing.  All that happened was Chizik asked a question and he got the answer everyone already knew.  Until the NCAA rules or says it is closed it is obviously open but that doesn't mean I should worry more, which is the way you are coming off.  So, in closing, unless you have some new credible evidence against Auburn, or some other insight that would suggest we should worry more, I suggest you just move on and wait for the results because you really just come off as a wishful thinking sore loser who can't handle UAT lost the Iron Bowl.

I am happy you finally admitted you don't know what really happened.

P.S.  How is that Milton McGregor trial going?  Where are those wiretaps and rigged casino cards?      



Since: Jul 12, 2010
Posted on: July 15, 2011 3:03 pm
 

NCAA investigation of Auburn isn't over

Maybe you need a refresher
FIRST DOWNS...................  
;     18     &nb
sp; 25

  Rushing..................... &
nbsp;     13     &nb
sp; 18
  Passing..................... &
nbsp;     
3     &nbs
p;  6
  Penalty..................... &
nbsp;     
2     &nbs
p;  1
NET YARDS RUSHING.............  &nb
sp;   115      440

  Rushing Attempts............  &nb
sp;    37     &nb
sp; 52
  Average Per Rush............   &
nbsp;  3.1      8.5
  Rushing Touchdowns..........  &nb
sp;     1     &nbs
p;  3
  Yards Gained Rushing........   &n
bsp;  155      448
  Yards Lost Rushing..........   
    40     &nb
sp;  8
NET YARDS PASSING.............  &nb
sp;   128     &n
bsp; 86

  Completions-Attempts-Int....  16-30-1  10-16-0
  Average Per Attempt.........   &
nbsp;  4.3      5.4
  Average Per Completion......   &
nbsp;  8.0      8.6
  Passing Touchdowns..........  &nb
sp;     1     &nbs
p;  0
TOTAL OFFENSE YARDS...........   &
nbsp;  243      526

  Total offense plays.........   &nb
sp;   67     &nb
sp; 68
  Average Gain Per Play.......    
  3.6      7.7
Fumbles: Number-Lost..........  &n
bsp;   2-0      1-1
Penalties: Number-Yards.......  &nbs
p;  4-24     7-45
PUNTS-YARDS................... 
;   6-302    3-112
  Average Yards Per Punt......     50.3     37.3
  Net Yards Per Punt..........   &nb
sp; 47.0     31.3
  Inside 20...................  &n
bsp;     5     &nbs
p;  1
  50+ Yards...................  
;      4     &nbs
p;  0
  Touchbacks.................. &
nbsp;     
1     &nbs
p;  0
  Fair catch..................  
      1     &nbs
p;  1
KICKOFFS-YARDS................ 
;   4-239    5-315
  Average Yards Per Kickoff...     59.8     63.0
  Net Yards Per Kickoff.......   &nb
sp; 38.0     39.0
  Touchbacks.................. &
nbsp;     
1     &nbs
p;  0
Punt returns: Number-Yards-TD.   2-18-0    0-0-0
  Average Per Return..........   &
nbsp;  9.0      0.0
Kickoff returns: Number-Yds-TD  5-120-0   3-67-0
  Average Per Return..........   &
nbsp; 24.0     22.3
Interceptions: Number-Yds-TD..    0-0-0   1-33-0

Yep, looks like we kicked you ass here...........I dont know guys, what do you think?  By the way, we as in AUBURN "ALL WE DO IS WIN" TIGERS vs The LS(WHO) tigers, yes LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)LS(WHO)  I know exactly who you are and what you represent you pathetic LOSER.

And for the loser from "WE CANT DECIDE ON A MASCOT"  Mississippi, Oh, I got one for you.... "LOSER"  suits you well

      
;     &nbs
p;     &nb
sp;     &n
bsp;     &
nbsp;     
  AU     &nb
sp; UM
FIRST DOWNS...................  
;     28     &nb
sp; 17

RUSHES-YARDS (NET)............   46-343   31-218
PASSING YDS (NET).............   &nbs
p;  229      189
Passes Att-Comp-Int........... 25-19-0 33-20-1 TOTAL OFFENSE PLAYS-YARDS.....   71-572   64-407
Fumble Returns-Yards..........  
    0-0      1-7
Punt Returns-Yards............ &nbs
p;   1--2      0-0
Kickoff Returns-Yards.........  &
nbsp; 5-176    9-173
Interception Returns-Yards....   
   1-0      0-0
Punts (Number-Avg)............   1-36.0   5-40.2
Fumbles-Lost.................. 
;     1-1      1-0
Penalties-Yards............... 
;    4-36      1-5
Possession Time...............  &nbs
p; 33:14    26:46
Third-Down Conversions........  9 of 13  6 of 14
Fourth-Down Conversions.......   0 of 0   1 of 2
Red-Zone Scores-Chances.......  &n
bsp;   4-4      3-4
Sacks By: Number-Yards........  &nb
sp;   0-0      2-9
 

A little better than LS(WHO) but still the same result, an ass whipping.....  These my friends are UNDISPUTED FACTS, right before your very eyes.  Maybe because of your lack of education and a 3rd grade reading level, you just dont understand.  Well, I will pray for you then...
























































































































Since: Jan 5, 2007
Posted on: July 15, 2011 2:55 pm
 

NCAA investigation of Auburn isn't over

No I understood them.  All I said was what you eventually said to me.  If they had something, it would have been the other way around, kind of like the Ohio State situation.  At the time of the reinstatement, if the NCAA had anything on Auburn, or Auburn felt they were in the wrong or in harms way of any kind, that reinstatement hearing would have never taken place.  So, by default, only three things could have happened.  Either the NCAA had nothing on Auburn, Auburn felt confident enough to roll the dice, or both.

More proof you see only what you want to see. The exact context was assuming the investigation was COMPLETE.

And my point with that is, AUBURN would not have had a chance to even request a Reinstatement hearing. If the investigation was complete and the NCAA had the smoking gun, then Aubunrn would have been forced to sit CAM, recieved an NOI, and repare for sanctions, and appeals.

But the investigation was NOT COMPLETE, and still is NOT COMPLETE, and even if the reinstatement hearing was today, the ONLY information that would be used at the hearing would be provided by Auburn, and only Auburn. Why, because the investigation is still ongoing and NOT COMPLETE.


So, in closing..NO, apparently YOU DO NOT and DID NOT understand the rules I posted, that or you just refuse to acknowldge what it means...



Since: Jan 5, 2007
Posted on: July 15, 2011 2:46 pm
 

NCAA investigation of Auburn isn't over

You guys really don't like eachother.

I just don't understand how you could possibly come to that conclusion Tongue out



Since: Jan 5, 2007
Posted on: July 15, 2011 2:43 pm
 

NCAA investigation of Auburn isn't over

Nice dodge.  Keep ignoring that you have nothing on Auburn and are not man enough to admit you don't know all the facts. It's really comical. 

Again, I have made no claims of fact against Auburn. The only thing I posted as fact, and argued,  was that the reinstatement of CAM was based on information provided to the NCAA by Auburn and ONLY Auburn. No investigation information from anyone, not even the NCAA. But you refuse to believe that. Why you refuse to believe that is the process, I dont know why you choose to ignore that, or believe that it is not the process.

 am really glad to see you are keeping your cool in this debate.
It's hard to keep your cool when dealing with a tool, and have them sit hear tell you a Bald Face Lie like "We never said there was no investigation"....BULL SH**. And make no mistake, you have not debated anything. You have provided nothing of substance other than how you "Feel", or what you "believe" with no information, fact or not, that supports why you feel or believe that way.

Basically your repsonse is "nuh uh, that ain't true". 

Let me say this...I have no idea if Auburn is guilty of anything. There are things that are suspicious, but I have no knowledge of this being fact.  I don't even know if I believe it, definitely not all of it.  And NOT ONCE have I said otherwise.

You keep accusing me of making accusations that I have not made...ever. 



 


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com