Perhaps this is what Kes is referencing..... http://espn.go.com/college-sports/s...es-include-parents-closes-cam-newton-loophole Well at least he didn't seek to arrange a trinket for tat swap.....
To expound upon BT's observation, I think Chizik really missed Cam this year, and since 200k wasn't enough, maybe he could be lured back for one more year of eligibility with 250k? Of course, it would have to go through "proper" channels...
Terry, I don't think it was ever ok but apparently there was no rule against it so the whole situation fell though the cracks. So now there is a rule.
it was never OK I really wish I had been able to retain a copy of every NCAA and conference certification test that I had to take. Each one had a question that dealt specifically with the issue of the parent soliciting the services of the child. What happened here is they flipped the rule on it's ear. The language was such that it was never truly clear but one would assume that if a parent/family member is/was shopping the child that the child would have to know about it. Even if he didn't know about it, that didn't make him any less of a professional. The Cam Newton episode is perhaps the most twisted and odd thing I've seen come out of the sewage pipe that is the NCAA. Everybody sold out.. everybody.