BYU and Auburn may never face each other in football or basketball, but the school from Utah already has an important victory over the school from Alabama: it believes in honor. As a matter of fact, the belief is to such an extent that the school has codified honor, adhering to the principles and moral foundation of the LDS Church, the entity which operates the school.
There was the Harvey Unga situation in BYU football last spring, where the school's all-time leading rusher was dismissed from school for a violation of the honor code. It was not a criminal act; it was, according to LDS principle and doctrine, an unethical act, premarital sex. Unga would have helped the team balance and kept some pressure off frosh quarterback phenom Jake Heaps.
Now there's the Brandon Davies situation in BYU basketball. Davies, the team's leading rebounder and third leading scorer, was suspended/dismissed from the team yesterday for the remainder of the season for a violation of the same honor code. BYU is ranked in the top five nationally with only two weeks to go before the NCAA tournament begins. A top bracket seed was possible and a #2 seed likely. Now all is in doubt, with BYU taking on a tough New Mexico team tonight and having to survive a tough Mountain West tournament next week before seedings and first-round NCAA tourney pairings are announced.
The violation occurred between the end of Saturday afternoon's game in San Diego and yesterday. When BYU officials learned of the transgression, they were quick to act. They were quick to follow the noble policy of erring on the side of integrity. This was not an NCAA violation; this was a BYU honor code violation. This was not punishment for criminal conduct. As in the Unga situation, this was punishment for what to them is unethical off-the-court/field conduct. Such unethical conduct includes academic dishonesty, premarital sex, irregular church attendance, poor personal grooming, gambling, cursing, homosexual relations, substance abuse of prescription or illegal drugs, and the use or possession of alcohol, coffee, tobacco, or pornography. You can probably strike poor personal grooming from the list of possible infractions.
In stark contrast to BYU's near-instantaneous and hard-line justice, there is the case of star quarterback Cam Newton's soft handling or mishandling at national champion Auburn. To understand Auburn's treatment of Mr. Newton, it is necessary to review and summarize Newton's off-the-field antics at the University of Florida. Why? After hearing Cam's history at Gainesville, what reasonable person would believe Cam when he said he knew nothing about his father's pay-for-play demands during Mississippi State's recruiting of him? Apparently, Auburn believed him. In truth, even the SEC and NCAA believed him. Bowl promoters believed him, too. Wait, wasn't there some type of fiscal incentive for believing in Cam Newton? It certainly helped the television network (ESPN), the BCS, the conference, and the school to keep him eligible.
What was Cam Newton like at Florida? First, he accumulated 12 driving infractions within an 18-month period, including driving with a suspended or revoked license. Rumor has it he was not #2 on the depth chart behind Tim Tebow, he was #3. Off the field, he was charged with two or three instances of academic cheating, including putting his name on another student's paper and handing in a paper bought off the internet.
He was also arrested on three felony counts by university police for being in possession of a stolen laptop computer. The Dell computer was worth about $1700, and Cam claimed he had bought the computer from another student with no knowledge it was stolen. However, one of the serial numbers had been changed and when the police left the room briefly to call the victim of the crime, Cam tossed the laptop out of his third-floor dorm room where it inaccurately landed behind the dumpster. If Mr. Newton were so innocent, why did he change a number and try to hide/destroy the evidence?
What kind of justice did Cam Newton receive at Florida? The burglary/larceny/obstruction of justice charges were dropped when Mr. Newton attended a first-time offender intervention program (lenient). However, he was suspended immediately from the football team after his arrest (hard-line). For academic cheating, Mr. Newton was set to appear in front of UF's Student Conduct Committee in the spring of 2009. Cam transferred to Blinn Community College in Texas before said hearing occurred. The result of his driving infractions is unknown.
After a solid season on the gridiron at Blinn that fall, Cam and his father Cecil were recruited by Tennessee, Oklahoma, Mississippi State, and Auburn. On November 27 and 28 of 2009, Cam and Cecil visited Mississippi State. Cecil told an MSU recruiter that it would take more than a scholarship for Cam to sign a letter of intent. It would take $180,000! Was Cam present when the demand was made? Cam says no. Cecil says no. The investigation is still pending. There are said to be tapes proving Cam's presence. They have yet to appear for investigators.
Less than one month later, Cam and Cecil visited Auburn on December 18 and 19. No details of any meetings or demands there have been revealed. Were any demands presented? Assume all was on the level when Auburn offered Mr. Newton a scholarship on December 20. Assume all was on the level when Mr. Newton signed his letter of intent with Auburn on December 31. Assume all was on the level when Auburn named Cam it starting quarterback on April 28, 2010.
In July of 2010, the SEC office notified Auburn of suspected improper recruiting conduct by Cecil Newton. What was done by the school? They started their own investigation, but kept Mr. Newton eligible. When the recruiting stories went national and public on November 4, 2010, the NCAA began its own investigation. Are we to assume the SEC and Auburn did not inform the NCAA office of their own investigations beforehand, or did the NCAA act in its own best interest by staying out of the loop until forced to launch its own query by public demand?
Regardless, it took the NCAA just 25 days to determine there had been a "violation of amateurism rules." The SEC and Auburn had been allegedly investigating since at least July. One day later, Auburn ruled Mr. Newton ineligible for the remainder of the season on November 30. No doubt, more calls were placed. Network executives, bowl committees, BCS committees, SEC officials, and even Auburn officials may have been involved. In any case, the NCAA reinstated Cam Newton a day later, on December 1, 2010, insuring higher ratings for the SEC title game and a possible goldmine-payday for a national championship game with similarly undefeated Oregon.
We know what happened. Cam Newton remained a cash cow for Auburn and the SEC. Cam Newton became, for better or worse, the face of college football in 2010. The BCS was happy, ESPN was happy, bowl organizers were happy, and sponsors were happy. Auburn won the national championship and Cam Newton won the Heisman.
Auburn, if it is proven they did err, erred on the side of profit. Will they lose the bowl game and merchandising revenue generated by a championship season if it is finally determined that Cam Newton was ineligible? No. Will they have to forfeit every game of 2010 and the title game of 2011? Yes.
Hasn't Auburn already erred by eagerly pursuing an athlete with Cam Newton's character? We know Mr. Newton obstructs justice, based on the Florida laptop case. What makes him credible? To Auburn, credibility is based on athleticism.
One cannot say BYU never makes mistakes. Going independent in football in 2012 for a few more dollars to the detriment of other Mountain West member schools and other BYU sports is a black eye to its reputation. Must it emulate the selfishness of another religious football school powerhouse, Notre Dame?
As for Brandon Davies, he will receive an honor code review to determine his status as a student and athlete for next year. He is done as an athlete for the remainder of this season.
BYU got the Brandon Davies and Harvey Unga cases 100% right. When in doubt, err on the side of integrity. Too bad more schools don't follow such a mandate.
No comments:
Post a Comment