The allegations began in November when a recruiter from Mississippi State University accused Cecil Newton, Cameron's father, of saying that it would take "more than just a scholarship" to get Cameron to transfer to Mississippi State. On December 1st, the NCAA announced Newton ineligible, as a response, Auburn instantly reinstated him. As the NCAA worked to get Newton reinstated, they concluded that his father and the recruiter were guilty of soliciting money from MSU but Cameron had not been aware of his father's actions. After that, Cameron was reinstated but his Cecil was restricted from Auburn's athletic program.
So we can all form our own opinions about whether or not Cameron actually knew about his father's rule-breaking actions but either way, the NCAA thought he was eligible for the Heisman Trophy award as he won with 729 first place votes.
This reminds me of the Reggie Bush Heisman situation. Yes, in both situations, rules were broken, but, in the end, does that affect whether or not they should be considered the best player in college football? I am not saying that since they were the best players from their years that they should be excused of any wrong doing that is committed but they should still be recognized. Especially in Newton’s situations; say he really didn’t know what his father was doing; he shouldn’t be punished for Cecil’s wrong-doings. In the end, I feel as though Cameron Newton deserves being recognized with the Heisman Trophy regardless of the soliciting his father took part in.
No comments:
Post a Comment