Plain Trouble on "Da Plains" (all AU posts here)

[KrAzY3]

Re: Plain Trouble on "Da Plains" (all AU posts here)

Is there anything there?

Full disclosure, all I feel for Auburn is dislike. Having said that, there are grenades going off all over the place. Even if Auburn actually tried to pretend they don't break the rules left and right, Charles Barkley publicly disputes that notion. Right now it isn't a matter of if Auburn runs a clean program or not, we both know that. Right now it is a matter of if they're going to get caught...

 

[B1GTide]

Re: Plain Trouble on "Da Plains" (all AU posts here)

Full disclosure, all I feel for Auburn is dislike. Having said that, there are grenades going off all over the place. Even if Auburn actually tried to pretend they don't break the rules left and right, Charles Barkley publicly disputes that notion. Right now it isn't a matter of if Auburn runs a clean program or not, we both know that. Right now it is a matter of if they're going to get caught...

But do you believe that THIS story is true?

 

[CrimsonForce]

Re: Plain Trouble on "Da Plains" (all AU posts here)

Take it in totality then, or even ignore the statement altogether. Is there anything there?

But do you believe that THIS story is true?

Asking "is there anything there" is a 2 part question:

1. Did a tutor take an exam for an AU football player? We have no idea. I'm sure it's probably happened at AU and a lot of other places over the years.

2. Will AU receive any punishment for this from the NCAA? Chances are slim to none.

But, my point is that it's extremely disingenuous to think that this didn't happened just because the AU athletic department said so. You're discounting the ESPN story because it was corrected but then believing the AU press release when AU had to correct and recant recent statements by Jay Jacobs and the athletic department. I doubt anything comes of this but it's not because AU said it didn't happen it's because situations like these are next to impossible to prove. Considering the state of athletics at AU I wouldn't put any faith in what the athletic department has to say about much of anything..

 

[TiderJack]

Re: Plain Trouble on "Da Plains" (all AU posts here)

Asking "is there anything there" is a 2 part question:

1. Did a tutor take an exam for an AU football player? We have no idea. I'm sure it's probably happened at AU and a lot of other places over the years.

2. Will AU receive any punishment for this from the NCAA? Chances are slim to none.

But, my point is that it's extremely disingenuous to think that this didn't happened just because the AU athletic department said so. You're discounting the ESPN story because it was corrected but then believing the AU press release when AU had to correct and recant recent statements by Jay Jacobs and the athletic department. I doubt anything comes of this but it's not because AU said it didn't happen it's because situations like these are next to impossible to prove. Considering the state of athletics at AU I wouldn't put any faith in what the athletic department has to say about much of anything..

Good point. It has to be blind faith if you do have faith.

 

[B1GTide]

Re: Plain Trouble on "Da Plains" (all AU posts here)

You're discounting the ESPN story because it was corrected but then believing the AU press release when AU had to correct and recant recent statements by Jay Jacobs and the athletic department.

No, I am discounting the story because there is no evidence and no credible source. They have a disgruntled former employee who has changed their story multiple times. Why the heck would I believe that person without some hard evidence?

 

[TiderJack]

Re: Plain Trouble on "Da Plains" (all AU posts here)

No, I am discounting the story because there is no evidence and no credible source. They have a disgruntled former employee who has changed their story multiple times. Why the heck would I believe that person without some hard evidence?

I'm sure everything the AU athletic dept puts out is truthful with no spin. Ole Miss also.

 

[B1GTide]

Re: Plain Trouble on "Da Plains" (all AU posts here)

I'm sure everything the AU athletic dept puts out is truthful with no spin. Ole Miss also.

Forget what AU said - just based on what the accuser said no reasonable person could conclude that Auburn did anything wrong here because the accuser has changed their story multiple times and offers no evidence other than their word (which again has changed multiple times).

So, we have an accusation from a source not at all credible. Imagine this was someone attacking Alabama. Would you believe them? If not, why then do you believe them when talking about Auburn?

 

[AUDub]

Re: Plain Trouble on "Da Plains" (all AU posts here)

Forget what AU said - just based on what the accuser said no reasonable person could conclude that Auburn did anything wrong here because the accuser has changed their story multiple times and offers no evidence other than their word (which again has changed multiple times).

So, we have an accusation from a source not at all credible. Imagine this was someone attacking Alabama. Would you believe them? If not, why then do you believe them when talking about Auburn?

Bama forum, bruh.

 

[techster79]

Re: Plain Trouble on "Da Plains" (all AU posts here)

With the proliferation of cell phones with cameras and social media, either there is nothing there in a lot of big D1 schools or they've gotten incredibly adept at keeping it under wraps.

 

[rolltide_21]

Re: Plain Trouble on "Da Plains" (all AU posts here)

Asking "is there anything there" is a 2 part question:

1. Did a tutor take an exam for an AU football player? We have no idea. I'm sure it's probably happened at AU and a lot of other places over the years.

2. Will AU receive any punishment for this from the NCAA? Chances are slim to none.

But, my point is that it's extremely disingenuous to think that this didn't happened just because the AU athletic department said so. You're discounting the ESPN story because it was corrected but then believing the AU press release when AU had to correct and recant recent statements by Jay Jacobs and the athletic department. I doubt anything comes of this but it's not because AU said it didn't happen it's because situations like these are next to impossible to prove. Considering the state of athletics at AU I wouldn't put any faith in what the athletic department has to say about much of anything..

I would also add that Lightfoot, Franklin, and White ALWAYS find no wrong doing when it comes to AU athletics. They're hired by that athletic department for a reason. Since it cannot be proven they can "accurately" put out a statement that nothing has been found. Three investigations in one year show's there's corruption in the department. Receiving punishment is another issue all together, as you noted.

 

[CrimsonForce]

Re: Plain Trouble on "Da Plains" (all AU posts here)

Forget what AU said - just based on what the accuser said no reasonable person could conclude that Auburn did anything wrong here because the accuser has changed their story multiple times and offers no evidence other than their word (which again has changed multiple times).

So, we have an accusation from a source not at all credible. Imagine this was someone attacking Alabama. Would you believe them? If not, why then do you believe them when talking about Auburn?

Do you read the article or just the headline? Several red flags that I'd be concerned about if this happened at Bama:


How did the player get a perfect score on the exam only a few weeks into the course?

A source told Outside the Lines that a mentor in Auburn's student-athlete support services department took an online final exam for at least one football player. The source said a tutor who worked with the mentor became aware of the alleged misconduct while reviewing a football player's academic records in February, noticing that the player had received a perfect grade on a final exam only a few weeks into the course. The source said the player told the tutor he had not taken the exam.

Then according to the article the tutor was told her job would not be renewed after alerting the mentor's supervisor:

After hearing that, the tutor alerted the mentor's supervisor, the source said. In August, the tutor who had reported the allegation was told her job wouldn't be renewed, according to the source; the tutor then reported the issue to Auburn's compliance director and the athletic department's human resources office.

Then, the email produced by the tutor contradicts (again) the statement by AU:

An attorney for the tutor -- who spoke to Outside the Lines on the condition of anonymity to protect the client's identity -- shared an email that was sent to the tutor on Aug. 31, in which an Auburn assistant athletic director advised the tutor that she was being placed on paid administrative leave while "the inquiry takes place" and "compliance goes through its process." The email did not indicate the tutor was being placed on administrative leave because of a dispute with a co-worker, as the Auburn statement released on Wednesday said. In that August email, the assistant AD also wrote that the mentor had been placed on administrative leave; however, the mentor on Tuesday told Outside the Lines that she had not been placed on administrative leave before leaving the program.

This is shady at best and systemic cheating at worse..

 

[CrimsonForce]

But (1) so far, the accuser keeps changing her story and has produced no evidence, (2) the internal investigation has turned up no evidence, (3) both the tutor and the former athlete deny it, and (4) even if it is true, it has zero NCAA implications -- it might result in the former athlete being denied the degree or required to take the exam over, and the tutor would surely be fired if it's true. But ONLY if some evidence pops up.

So far, this is just ESPN publishing the whining accusation of a person who lost their job. People can make up anything. Not only is there no fire, there's not even any smoke.

Why would they even publish this?

This is an important point. Maybe I missed it but who's accusing her of changing her story except AU. If, IF, she took an exam for a player because she asked to by someone in the AU athletic department and then signed the sheets saying no wrongdoing she was clearly doing as she was told to keep her job. Coming out after the fact and telling the truth doesn't qualify as "she keeps changing her story." To me it just means that she decided to tell the truth. We don't know the absolute truth and probably never will but if AU is the only entity accusing her of changing her story I'd need more than that to disqualify what she's saying..

 

[B1GTide]

This is an important point. Maybe I missed it but who's accusing her of changing her story except AU. If, IF, she took an exam for a player because she asked to by someone in the AU athletic department and then signed the sheets saying no wrongdoing she was clearly doing as she was told to keep her job. Coming out after the fact and telling the truth doesn't qualify as "she keeps changing her story." To me it just means that she decided to tell the truth. We don't know the absolute truth and probably never will but if AU is the only entity accusing her of changing her story I'd need more than that to disqualify what she's saying..

First, the accuser did not take the exam for the "player". She is accusing another person at Auburn of doing so (a mentor).

Second, she told ESPN that this was a current Auburn player, then changed it to a 2016 player. It turns out that it was a 2015 player. So there is some lost credibility there for several reasons.

Finally, the exam was taken in February. The accuser signed multiple documents indicating that she knew of no academic wrongdoing after that date. Only after an altercation with another employee at Auburn did she decide to do something. The timing hurts her credibility.

So, she doesn't know that there was cheating - she is accusing someone else. We have no idea what happened between her and the rest of her team, but something happened and she is now looking to take some people down.

Now, I am not saying that this didn't happen. All that I am saying is, if this is all that comes out, would you conclude that she is a credible enough person in this instance to take action? And since the "player" has not been a player since 2015, why would Auburn's staff be helping him cheat on an exam? It just doesn't pass the smell test.

 

[CrimsonForce]

First, the accuser did not take the exam for the "player". She is accusing another person at Auburn of doing so (a mentor).

Second, she told ESPN that this was a current Auburn player, then changed it to a 2016 player. It turns out that it was a 2015 player. So there is some lost credibility there for several reasons.

Finally, the exam was taken in February. The accuser signed multiple documents indicating that she knew of no academic wrongdoing after that date. Only after an altercation with another employee at Auburn did she decide to do something. The timing hurts her credibility.

So, she doesn't know that there was cheating - she is accusing someone else. We have no idea what happened between her and the rest of her team, but something happened and she is now looking to take some people down.

Now, I am not saying that this didn't happen. All that I am saying is, if this is all that comes out, would you conclude that she is a credible enough person in this instance to take action? And since the "player" has not been a player since 2015, why would Auburn's staff be helping him cheat on an exam? It just doesn't pass the smell test.

If this is all that comes out of course not. I've said repeatedly I don't think anything will come of this but not because AU said they're clean or because it isn't true. That's how this debate got started. Our resident AU fan wants to proclaim that since the accuser, allegedly, changed her story that she loses credibility. Well, we don't know that she changed the material facts of her story. AU has changed several of their statements recently which were flat out lies so why should we believe their statement this time? The only truth in this is that we'll never know the truth. It's just funny how certain fans want to act like their programs are squeaky clean. I'm sure there's been some type of academic fraud at Alabama over the years. If a story came out about it I'd be concerned because like I said this type of stuff probably goes on everywhere at different scales. It's comical that someone would act like the AU athletic department is above academic fraud when the same department hired a softball coach with a history of improprieties and the only school to ever hire a basketball coach (who is a known cheater) with a show cause. There's also strong rumors about an ongoing scandal with the women's basketball program..

 

[CrimsonNagus]

Outside the Lines isn't known for publishing false stories. AU athletic department is known for releasing false statements. Until more comes out, if that ever happens, I'll lean towards believing OLT more than the AU athletic department.

 

[B1GTide]

Outside the Lines isn't known for publishing false stories. AU athletic department is known for releasing false statements. Until more comes out, if that ever happens, I'll lean towards believing OLT more than the AU athletic department.

That's fine since their story is that a person who lacks credibility is making an accusation. They admit that they have nothing else. That is the story. I believe it, too. I only question why they published it.

 

[OBMS]

 

[RT27]

I never believe AU athletics, this place got caught red handed paying players under DYE and around that time gave a degree to a player who could only read n a 3rd grade level. That came out when he was in NFL and could not read 90 % of his contract. YEAH they are squeaky clean, oh lets not forget the latest coach fired for money funneling from athletic apparel company, BUT HEY I buy anything AU athletics says babhahahahahahahahhaha OKAY I fgot some water front property for sale, any AU fans interested?

 

[rolltide7854]

I never believe AU athletics, this place got caught red handed paying players under DYE and around that time gave a degree to a player who could only read n a 3rd grade level. That came out when he was in NFL and could not read 90 % of his contract. YEAH they are squeaky clean, oh lets not forget the latest coach fired for money funneling from athletic apparel company, BUT HEY I buy anything AU athletics says babhahahahahahahahhaha OKAY I fgot some water front property for sale, any AU fans interested?

Pay them enough and the aubie cover up law firm will assist in writing the ad for it. Is it in Arizona?

 

[CB4]

First, the accuser did not take the exam for the "player". She is accusing another person at Auburn of doing so (a mentor).

Second, she told ESPN that this was a current Auburn player, then changed it to a 2016 player. It turns out that it was a 2015 player. So there is some lost credibility there for several reasons.

Finally, the exam was taken in February. The accuser signed multiple documents indicating that she knew of no academic wrongdoing after that date. Only after an altercation with another employee at Auburn did she decide to do something. The timing hurts her credibility.

So, she doesn't know that there was cheating - she is accusing someone else. We have no idea what happened between her and the rest of her team, but something happened and she is now looking to take some people down.

Now, I am not saying that this didn't happen. All that I am saying is, if this is all that comes out, would you conclude that she is a credible enough person in this instance to take action? And since the "player" has not been a player since 2015, why would Auburn's staff be helping him cheat on an exam? It just doesn't pass the smell test.

Possibly because the program's APR (Academic Progress Rate) can be improved (earn bonus points) by having a student athlete return and complete their degree? Not saying this is the case, but it is a possibility.

What doesn't pass the smell test is taking and passing an online course final (with a perfect score no less) a few weeks into the course.

And let's take a stroll down memory lane to 2012 when Auburn was looking to eliminate Public Administration because it didn't fit the school's "academic mission". And low and behold over half of the public administration majors (111 majors) were athletes and 40 of those were football players. So important was "Public Administration" to the athletic department that they offered to fund it. Nothing fishy about that...

Then step back to 2006 and the Sociology no show classes in which papers were being written in lieu of class attendance and had a disproportionate number of athletes in the class. And the course was a required course for graduation in sociology and the course was being directed by a Professor in Criminology. Nothing fishy about that...


And who can forget the James Brooks story of a guy that left there after four years functionally illiterate. My brother was on faculty at Auburn at the time. When the story broke during his child support court case, my brother said that Brooks' issue was well known among faculty.

If there is hanky panky going on in academics, it wouldn't be the first time.