Strange....strange year for the Heisman voting.....which has already gone down most likely. On the field Newton is the man.....well ahead of some very good contenders who will also join him in NY but nonetheless....Cam Newton will win hands down. That is in spite of what is being said.....and written about him (from CFN): "Cecil Newton, meet Rod Blagojevich, another guy who got in hot water for a failed business transaction. According to the NCAA offices, “The solicitation of cash or benefits by either a potential student-athlete or another person on their behalf is not allowed under NCAA rules.” And, “an agent is any individual who markets or promotes a student-athlete.” The NCAA has used those two sentences to suspend player after player, and if it believed that Cecil solicited money from Mississippi State in attempt to market Cam, then it shouldn’t have mattered who knew what. That’s it. Even if there was no smoking gun, there didn’t need to be. It might not have been fair or just to Cam, but if the NCAA was going by its own rules, regulations, and interpretations, then the “I didn’t know” defense shouldn’t have worked. It almost never has before and now, legally, it can be used by any player to get out of any potential jam. The fact that money never changed hands doesn’t matter. You can’t solicit on behalf of your son, period, and when you allegedly market your son in an attempt to get money for a signature, you’re acting as the textbook definition of an agent. The government in the Blago trial put it best: “You don't have to be a successful criminal to be a criminal.” Obviously, Cecil Newton isn’t a criminal, but he didn’t need to receive $180,000 to break the rules.
Unless you can tie the son to the father as an active accomplice I'm not sure what there is to discuss. As far as qualifications go, this should be the most lopsided vote in history because this year, this kid has no equal.
I'm no lawyer, but IMO the phrase "on their behalf" assumes that the student-athlete either formally authorized the person to act "on his behalf" or at the very least has knowledge that the person is doing so. IMO the same goes for the definition of an agent. There has to be some knowledge/permission/authorization on the part of the student-athlete. Apparently, the NCAA either had no evidence that this was the case or found without question that Cam Newton was not aware of his father's conduct. As much as I disagree with some of the ways the NCAA goes about its business, their investigations are thorough. One thing I'm certain they don't do under any circumstances is give student-athletes a pass.