Auburn Will Try to Give the SEC Its Fifth Consecutive BCS Title

Posted on December 14, 2010 by Jacob Bunn

Noah Webster defines it as commanding, controlling, and prevailing over all others. I am certainly not Webster, but I can add another definition to the term dominance, S-E-C. In fact, dominating really does an injustice to the success that the Southeastern Conference has had since the BCS era began.

It all started in 1998, when Tennessee took the stage against Florida State in the very first BCS Championship Game. The Volunteers won that game, which was ironically played in Arizona, 23-16. That would begin the takeover the SEC would impose on college football. Since that year, LSU has won it twice (2003, 2007), Florida has won it twice (2006, 2008), and Alabama won it last year. So of the twelve BCS Championships that have already taken place, the SEC has won six.

So, that brings us to 2010. Before the season, the chatter was all about who would win the SEC because it was a foregone conclusion that whoever won it would go on to win the national championship. Alabama, Florida, and LSU were the most popular preseason choices by most of the so-called experts to take the conference crown this year. Instead, this year would see a different team shoot through.

Auburn was ranked very low, if at all, in most preseason polls, but by mid-season, the Tigers made it clear that they were not fooling around. Auburn went on to go 12-0, win the SEC Championship Game, and secure a spot in Glendale for the national championship.

Face it, another SEC team has broken through. Not only will Auburn give the SEC its seventh BCS Championship if it wins, it will give the conference the majority of all BCS Championships.  

But, is it all about the end result?

For the past month, anyone associated with college football has been exposed to the ongoing scandal involving Cam Newton and Auburn. It is one thing to have reports from sources in the media saying that a player was solicited for money. It is another for the NCAA to say that. And on December 1st, the governing body of college football, the NCAA, stated that a violation of amateurism rules occurred in the recruitment of Auburn quarterback Cam Newton.

Inexplicably, the NCAA decided in an unprecedented manner not to enforce a penalty for this illegal action.

Many questions can be legitimately raised about the process by which Newton was reinstated by the NCAA. First, in the statement released by the NCAA, it was stated that a violation of amateur athletics did indeed occur. The NCAA also stated that the reason for not penalizing Auburn in this matter is because Cam Newton or Auburn had no knowledge of this solicitation by Cecil Newton, Cam’s father. That sounds great, but it certainly sets a new precedent. If your child has aptitude for a particular sport, you may want to shop him or her around to the nearest universities. Do let me know how it turns out.

Another question I have is about the timing of this matter. Regardless of the reports from media outlets, Auburn had no new information concerning a possible violation during the regular season. Then after the weekend of the Iron Bowl, Auburn ruled Newton ineligible. So, we are all supposed to believe that new information happened to conveniently surface immediately after the biggest game of the season.

The bigger question, though, is why would the NCAA make a ruling such as this one? Could they have been concerned about the backlash from the general public? Could they have not wanted to singlehandedly be responsible for the downfall of a truly amazing Auburn season? Or could Mike Slive have argued, in defense attorney form, for the reinstatement staff to give Cam Newton the green light immediately?

Aside from the NCAA bylaw that was violated, an SEC bylaw was also shattered. SEC bylaw 14.01.3.2 states that an athlete is ineligible for competition when he/she or any member of his/her family receives or agrees to receive, directly or indirectly, any aid or assistance. In this case, the key term would be “agrees to receive.” Although SEC officials have released statements saying that this bylaw does not apply to the current situation, the piece of conference legislation continues to glaringly sit there.

So the obvious question that everyone wants answered is why would the Southeastern Conference sell its soul for one player, one team, and one potential championship? The answer is anyone’s best guess.

Is this not the kind of situation for which the rule is in the books? The message being sent by the NCAA and SEC is very loud and very clear:  As long as the athlete in question is the best in the nation, as long as the team to be penalized is undefeated and the best in the nation, penalties will not be enforced.

Will anything ever happen to Auburn or Newton over this issue? No one seems to know for sure. What we do know is everything to do with the SEC is now open to interpretation.   

The mighty dollar rules all, we know that. I wonder, though, how long the incoming dollar will remain mighty for the NCAA and SEC with rulings such as this one being made.

Contact Jacob Bunn at jacobabunn@yahoo.com