Georgia Bulldogs: Tough Break for Trinton, What's Next for Georgia?

Photo Credit: DAVID MANNING

Trinton Sturdivant is out for the 2011season. He tore the anterior crucial ligament (ACL) in his right knee during Saturday's scrimmage and will spend the next year rehabbing.

Because Sturdivant took a medical redshirt in 2008—a player who uses his redshirt season for medical reasons is eligible to apply for a medical hardship year—he could possibly receive a sixth year of eligibilty from the NCAA based on his circumstances.

Medical Hardship Waivers

In order to be eligible for a medical hardship waiver, a student-athlete must have competed in at least one contest in the first half of the season, but no more than three contests or 30%, whichever is greater (14.2.4). The total number of contests is calculated by the schedule on the first date of competition. Participation in Conference postseason is counted as one competition.

If a student-athlete is unable to compete at all during an entire season because of an injury or illness, the student-athlete may not file for a medical hardship waiver. In this case, the season would be considered a medical redshirt season.

If the student-athlete has two or more seasons of medical redshirt because of an injury or illness (or one season of medical redshirt and one season of medical hardship), the Compliance Office can file for an extension of the five-year clock (a sixth year) only after the student-athlete has reached the end of the existing five-year clock [emphasis added].

However, much of this seems unlikely given Sturdivant's flirtation with the NFL this past season. He may want to take this opportunity to get strong and apply for next year's draft in hopes of having a ahot at playing in the pros.

We'll have to wait and see what happens here, but it's most likely Sturdivant has played his last game at the University of Georgia.

That said, the next question is what will Georgia do at left tackle?

Cordy Glenn appears to be the best option as he has experience playing the position, but if he moves from right tackle—a position he is admittedly more comfortable playing—Georgia will have to find someone to take his place. Some choices, according to Anthony Dasher of UGASports.com, would be Austin Long, Kolton Houston, and Justin Anderson.

Kolton Houston is a redshirt freshman with plenty of talent, but he seems best built to play offensive guard due to his average pass-blocking skills. He has impressed offensive line coach, Will Friend, in practices thus far, but it seems doubtful he would be ready to play right tackle this season. That said, he has gotten some looks all across the line this spring and remains a legitimate option—even if only as a reserve.

Justin Anderson has moved back to the offensive line after one season of trying his wares on defense, and while he's adjusted well to being back in his natural element, he's practiced solely at guard this spring. Add to that, Anderson has a lengthy injury history—he missed a majority of 2010 with a turf toe—and may not be physically ready for the rigors of playing on the outside.

Austin Long is the wild card of this bunch. He was highly touted when he arrived at Georgia, but has been besieged by injuries and hasn't contributed much. This is his first spring of really giving it a go and he's already had to miss some time with a sore shoulder.

Those are Georgia's best options for the moment, but there is still the possibility they could find their solution when the 2011 signees enroll—Watts Dantzler, Zach DeBell, and Xzavier Ward among them.

Looks like coach Friend has a lot more work yet to do this spring.

Related articles

• Gerogia Bulldogs OT Trinton Sturdivant has torn right ACL, will miss season (sports.espn.go.com)
• Heartbreak v3.0: UGA lineman suffers another ACL tear (collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com)

Former Auburn Player Not Impressed With HBO's Choice of Interviewees

You have to love Twitter for it's ability to catch the instantaneous thoughts of it's Tweeters.

Kody Bliss, a former punter for the Auburn Tigers—yes, the punter—had this to say about the guys HBO chose to interview for the expose on Auburn:

 

I guess Mr. Bliss would know a dummy if he saw one, he was an academic standout at Auburn—sporting a 3.45 cumulative GPA in marketing as a student there.

Bliss didn't stop there, he went on to say this about Stanley McClover:

I don't know if that clears things up or not, but I suspect the HBO story will get more interesting by the day as more people weigh in on it's participants and the motives behind them coming forward—particularly Chaz Ramsey who sued the athletic department at Auburn in 2009. His case was dismissed in February.

Rumor has it, the restaurant/bar where Ramsey works has been boycotted by some of the Auburn faithful until the owner fires him—hope this kid has a backup plan...outside of Auburn, that is.

Auburn Football: HBO Special Looks Damning, But Proves Nothing

Stanley McClover

The internet was abuzz late yesterday after portions of an HBO program—airing tonight—were leaked by the website, SportsByBrooks. In the segment, four former Auburn football players go on-the-record and say they were paid by the school to both secure and keep their services.

While all four players had plenty of dirt to dish, some of the more eyebrow-raising statements came from the mouth of Stanley McClover, a former defensive star, who stated that he switched his commitment from Ohio State to Auburn after receiving a bookbag full of money. 

Here is how McClover described the incident to Andrea Kremer:

Kremer voiceover: “McClover says what he asked for was money. A lot of it. And that he got it. Delivered in a bookbag, exact amount unknown.”

Kremer to McClover: “You opened it up, what are you thinking?”

McClover: “I almost passed out. I literally almost passed out I couldn’t believe it was true. I felt like I owed them.”

Kremer to McClover: “You felt obligated to them (Auburn)?”

McClover: “I felt totally obligated.”

Kremer to McClover: “Because of the money?”

McClover: “Yeah.”

As wild as that sounds, McClover isn't bringing anything new to the table where accusations about pay-to-play at Auburn is concerned.

Former head coach, Terry Bowden, expressed a similar account in 2001—although it would be two-years before anyone knew of his statements—when he told a reporter "They [Auburn Boosters] were paying players cash, $12,000, $15,000 to sign...all I was told to do was shake hands and say, 'Thank you. I appreciate how much you love Auburn."

The collective fingers have been pointing in Auburn's direction for years.

That said, the one thing the HBO expose doesn't seem to offer is the one thing that would make this story the most damning—proof.

You can hate the Auburn Tigers all you want, but until the fire starts surfacing on all this smoke, it's much ado about nothing. And if you think NCAA investigators are on a plane to Auburn at this very moment, don't hold your breath.

Marc Emmert (NCAA's idiot President) already looks like a shill for how he's handle some very high profile cases—Cam Newton, Ohio State, Jim Tressel, etc.—and he's not looking to make any moves towards further tarnishing his already fragile reputation by investigating Auburn based on a few claims by some previous players.

Those accusations will need to be accompanied by something more valid—a paper trail, a name, or a tape would be a nice start—before this debacle takes on the shape of something more than just a witch hunt.

That's just being honest.

In the end, it's another blemish on Auburn's resume—at least in the court of public opinion—but when you get right down to it, without proof, this is just another juicy story.

Related articles

• "SportsbyBrooks: Four Former Auburn Players Make Pay-for-Play Allegations" and related posts (rollbamaroll.com)
• Report: Four former Auburn players got cash (sports.espn.go.com)

The NCAA: Oh What A Tangled Web You Weave...

"The NCAA is amazing...every time you turn around, they come up with something new to ensure that the young men that have poured their hearts and souls and energy and intellect into their craft are continually kept at a disadvantage when everybody else around them is running to the bank." (Bill Rabinowitz, Columbus Dispatch, 12/24/10)

The comments above were made by the mother of Ohio State wide receiver, DeVier Posey. Posey, if you'll remember, was one of the players suspended by the NCAA for selling his Big Ten Championship ring.

Once the dust settled on the scandal, it was revealed that Posey's mother, Julie, was the reason the ring was sold. The widowed mother of four is constantly struggling to make ends meet and Posey saw no harm in selling his ring to help her out—as Ms. Posey put it, "There's no crime here. None. They're not involved with agents. They didn't steal anything. They didn't borrow anything from anybody. It was theirs. Nobody told them it 'almost belongs to you.' It belonged to them."

While it's easy to empathize with a son who simply wishes to help his mother in any way that he can, it also begs the question (yet again) of who the bad guy truly is in these situations—is it the player or is it the NCAA?

Jason Whitlock, a reporter for FoxSports.com, published an article lashing out at the "greedy" NCAA and it's exploitative nature where collegiate athletes are concerned. The article references the forthcoming HBO Special (airing tonight), "Real Sports With Bryant Gumbel", which speaks of former UCLA basketball star Ed O'Bannon.

O'Bannon has sued the NCAA for the contract he, and thousands of other players have been forced to sign. A contract which states that they are forbidden from earning a dime off their college careers—ever.

Can you imagine that? A player not being granted control over his image, his likeness, or his name—as it applies to his collegiate career—while the NCAA has the ability to do so in perpetuity?

Granted, if this is indeed true, the player is made aware of this before he puts pen to paper. He could always just walk away and leave the scholarship, a chance at collegiate glory, and an opportunity to play at the next level, on the table. He doesn't have to do anything, really.

But, let's be honest, what player is going to walk away from that opportunity? Not many, and both the player and the NCAA are well-aware of this fact.

More and more the NCAA proves itself to be as self-serving and hypocritical as any other monopoly. They aren't governed by any outside entity and haven't, until now, been forced to answer to any one about how they choose to operate. However, at some point, the fit hits the shan and you have to start asking the question of whether or not the NCAA is operating in the best interests of amateurism or in the best interest of itself—especially when more and more, the latter appears to be the case.

Related articles

• Auburn Football Players To Claim Widespread Pay-For-Play In HBO Special (sbnation.com)

Jim Tressel: Playing The NCAA Like A Fiddle

Photo Credit: Marvin Fong/The Plain Dealer

Listen to this: Jim Tressel has decided to increase his suspension from the paltry, pathetic, and laughable two games that he initially felt was fair to five—like his players.

For those of you who don't remember the story, here's the recap: in January, five of Ohio State's football players were suspended by the NCAA for the first five games of the 2011 season for accepting tattoos in exchange for signed memorabilia. Tressel, at the time, feigned ignorance and said he had no knowledge of what his players were doing. He admonished them for their actions and moved on from the matter with no further commentary.

However, it was recently discovered that not only did Tressel know what was going on with said players, but he hid what he knew from the public as best he could by lying. His reasoning for doing so, he "feared" for the safety of his players.

Ohio State's response to finding out what Tressel did was to suspend him for two-games and fine him $250,000.

Well, obviously, the NCAA isn't looking for anymore criticism from the college football pundits of the world because they told Ohio State and Tressel to shove that two game suspension and come up with something better. Tressel's response, get this, he'll accept five games. The hell you say?...You'll accept five?!? Is that a joke? Surely, Tressel has to understand that his punishment, by virtue of his stature and crime, should be worse than that of his players.

After all, he did lie to the NCAA. Quite frankly, in my humble opinion, anything less than the a season-long suspension isn't worth talking about.

There should be no mercy for him or Ohio State because this isn't a case of, "aw, man, I had no idea". Tressel's actions were committed with full-knowledge of the consequences and he should be held to the fire for his actions.

Now, before we get the folks who'll scream, 'Hey, Lady, you think college football is a clean sport? You think Tressel is the exception and not the rule', let me make this clear, I don't care about the perception of college football. Perception is not the point.

We all understand that coaches break rules, teams cheat, and players can be bought—this isn't me living in a Utopian paradise where those kinds of things never happen. But, if the NCAA doesn't address this situation more forcefully, then why bother having the rules in the first place?

You have to start making an example of coaches at some point and, if that lesson begins with Jim Tressel—so be it.

Tressel should be forced to sit out the season for what he did, anything less is a joke.

Related articles

• Jim Tressel hit with two-game suspension, $250K fine (collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com)

Georgia Bulldogs: Wherefore Art Thou, Israel Troupe?

Photo Credit: Kelly Lambert

In case you're a regular reader and were wondering what's up with the "Wherefore Art Thou..." question, here's the deal: its the slow part of the year (as far as college football), so what started out as a cutesy title for an article about Georgia Bulldog defensive back, Jakar Hamilton, is now—for the moment—a weekly profile of players who have failed to live up to expectations.

Now that the housekeeping is out of the way, let's move on to Israel Troupe.

Troupe, a former dual-sport standout for Tift County High School, will enter his senior season with the Georgia Bulldogs in 2011, and his career, to this point, can only be described as unexceptional.

What happened to this prospect who was once recognized as one of the top players in the state? What has played the biggest role in his lack of development? In my opinion, he's never truly given his total effort to playing the game of football.

As a high school senior, Troupe didn't hold gridiron dreams. His love was for baseball and, had he gone as high in the MLB Draft as he would have liked, he likely never would have committed to play football at Georgia. However, he would eventually be selected in the 31st round—effectively making his decision to play football a no-brainer—ending his dreams of playing pro ball before they began. 

Since that time, Troupe has attempted to have one foot in both worlds. Whether he was looking into practicing with the Georgia Baseball team, or considering signing on with the Athens Pirates (an amateur baseball team), Troupe has never been completely focused on football and that has hurt him more than the nagging injuries or the shifting depth chart.

Will he finally be something more than a warm body in a red and black uniform, or will he continue to be a non-factor as he's been in his entire career thus far? 

The 10 Most Corrupt College Athletic Programs

Let’s face it, our favorite college athletic programs sometimes feel a need to cheat. According to Insider Higher Ed, almost half of all big-time college sports programs have been punished for major violations by the NCAA during the last decade and these days, even the Ivy League sports programs aren’t immune to major infractions.

That being said, the following programs take the cake for being the most notorious repeat offenders in the game—the blatant cheaters who always seem to have NCAA investigators breathing down their necks. These are the places where the phrase "lack of institutional control" simply becomes redundant:


1. Arizona State — Nine Major Infractions: Most of the Sun Devils' violations have come as a result of wrongdoing within the baseball program—which has been recognized as one of the best in the nation. With former players like Reggie Jackson and Barry Bonds to call their own, ASU is considered one of the premier programs for producing big name talent but, in recent years, they have been a lot less mindful of how they do business in Tempe and, this past December, they were penalized for major secondary violations, resulting in three years probation and a one-year ban from the NCAA postseason. The NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions cited, amongst other things "the improper recruitment of a player, the improper use of student managers during practices, improper benefits given to players for work not done totaling $5,889.34 and impermissibly using a privately owned athletics training facility located on the ASU campus and not paying for those services, valued at approximately $60,000." The litany of problems led to the forced resignation of coach Pat Murphy, who led the Sun Devils to four College World Series appearances.

2. SMU — Eight Major Infractions: Holding the unfortunate distinction of being just one of five programs in NCAA history to suffer the "death penalty", SMU football is still the poster child for corruption in major college athletics. Its capital offense was maintaining a slush fund to pay players from the mid-1970s to the mid-1980s, even when the program was already on probation—from 1974 to 1985—it was penalized on five separate occasions. Because SMU was under such intense scrutiny from the NCAA, the powers that be had little choice but to levy the harshest penalty. As a result, the 1987 and 1988 season were canceled, 55 scholarships were stripped away, and the team was permitted to hire just five full-time assistant coaches—instead of the regular nine—and the program was crippled for almost two decades.

3. Auburn — Seven Major Infractions: Seven major infractions for now, anyway, but the Cam Newton situation aside, Auburn has had a difficult time playing by the rules over the years. Its most embarrassing incident occurred in 1991, when 60 Minutes aired recordings of head football coach Pat Dye arranging a loan for a player. The series of incriminating tapes were provided by former star defensive back Eric Ramsey and unveiled a pay-for-play scheme involving the coaching staff and prominent booster "Corky" Frost. For its wrongdoing, Auburn received a two-year bowl ban, a one-year television ban, and lost 13 scholarships over a four-year period. Dye was replaced by Terry Bowden, who became the first Division 1 coach to go undefeated in his first season.

4. Minnesota — Seven Major Infractions: During his 13-year stint as Minnesota’s head basketball coach, Clem Haskins oversaw runs to the Elite Eight, Final Four and NIT Championship. Today, however, only the Elite Eight appearance remains in the NCAA record books, as everything Haskins accomplished from 1993 forward was vacated. Prior to the Golden Gophers’ appearance in the 1999 NCAA tournament, a former basketball office manager revealed that she had written more than 400 papers for numerous basketball players over several years. Haskins’ contract was bought out over the summer and he later admitted to paying her $3,000 for her work. As the NCAA investigation unfolded, he was accused of paying players, persuading professors to inflate players’ grades and ignoring sexual harassment concerns. The NCAA administered massive sanctions, notably docking five scholarships over three seasons and instituting recruiting limitations. The entire athletic department suffered, as athletic director, associate athletic director, vice president for student development and athletics and academic counselor were all forced to resign due to the scandal.

5. Oklahoma — Seven Major Infractions: Barry Switzer inherited a program on probation—it forfeited nine games from the 1972 season because of violations that resulted from the alteration of players’ transcripts—and left it on probation in 1988. The Sooners garnered the reputation of being an outlaw program in the 1980s. During one rough patch, a shooting and rape occurred in an athletic dorm, a player attempted to sell drugs to an undercover agent, and a player robbed Switzer’s home. The latter player probably didn’t receive personal checks from Switzer, scalped game tickets, free airline tickets, or a boatload of money from a bidding war during his recruitment. All of that happened, and it resulted in a two-year bowl ban, a one-year live television ban, and recruiting restrictions. More recently, Oklahoma’s basketball program was penalized when former basketball coach Kelvin Sampson, the same guy who later crippled the Indiana basketball program due to unethical recruiting practices, made 550 illegal calls to 17 different recruits.

6. Texas A&M — Seven Major Infractions: The Southwest Conference was probably the most corrupt entity in the history of college sports. If you competed in the SWC during the 1980s, and weren’t cheating, you didn’t have a pulse. Not coincidentally, Texas A&M enjoyed quite a bit of success during that decade, winning three consecutive conference titles under Jackie Sherrill. Sherrill resigned in 1988, after the NCAA discovered that assistant coaches and boosters were providing improper benefits to recruits—one was given a sports car and another’s father was offered medical treatment. The Aggies were given two years of probation, banned from the postseason for one season and docked 10 scholarships. Additional violations by the basketball program in 1991 and the football program again in 1994—a booster employed and overpaid nine players who didn’t really work—almost caused A&M to suffer the same fate as SMU did in the late 80's.

7. Wichita State — Seven Major Infractions: Programs from smaller conferences are just as capable of skirting the rules as the big boys. Although Wichita State doesn’t have a football program, its baseball and basketball programs have flourished. The baseball program has been one of the most successful in recent history, winning the 1989 College World Series and finishing second in 1982, 1991, and 1993. The basketball program reached the Final Four in 1965, Elite Eight in 1981 and Sweet Sixteen in 2006. Of the program’s seven infractions, perhaps the most disheartening one occurred in 1982, not long after the team reached the Elite Eight. Violations involving promises of cash and airline tickets resulted in the stripping of two basketball scholarships over two seasons and a ban from both the NCAA tournament and the NIT. At the time the penalties were imposed, Wichita State led the NCAA in major infractions.

8. Wisconsin — Seven Major Infractions: Just months after its basketball program reached the Final Four in 2000, the Wisconsin athletic department was embroiled in controversy. Twenty-six football players were suspended, prior to the season opener, after the NCAA uncovered that members of the Badgers’ football and basketball teams were given special credit arrangements at a shoe store. A year later, Wisconsin began serving five years of probation—which included scholarship reductions in both football and basketball—for giving recruiting inducements and extra benefits, as well as an overall failure to properly monitor its athletic program. The Badgers have managed to survive the last decade without any other major violations, and the football and basketball programs have continued to enjoy consistent success.

9. Florida State — Seven Major Infractions: Former rival coach Steve Spurrier once referred to FSU as Free Shoes University, a zinger derived from a 1993 scandal in which nine Florida State players went on an agent-funded shopping spree at Foot Locker. Six years later, during a national championship run, all-American wide receivers, Peter Warrick and Laveranues Coles, were charged with felony grand theft for receiving $412.38 worth of clothes from a Dillard’s cashier for which they only paid $21.40. Warrick was suspended for two games and Coles from thrown off the team. In 2009, Bobby Bowden was forced to vacate 12 victories because of an academic cheating scandal that also involved the men’s and women’s basketball, baseball, softball and men’s track and field programs–a 2007 men’s track national championship was vacated as well. The penalties ensured Bowden wouldn’t catch Joe Paterno as the FBS’s all-time winningest coach.

10. Memphis — Seven Major Infractions: The good feelings that accompanied Memphis State’s 1985 Final Four run diminished in the ensuing years as karma, tragedy and bad luck befell various members of the team and coaching staff: head coach Dana Kirk was fired in 1986 after the NCAA uncovered recruiting violations and vacated the 1985 Final Four appearance, he later served a prison term for tax evasion, a crime he committed while he served as the head coach. Star center William Bedford was drafted sixth overall in the 1986 NBA draft, but his career was derailed by drug addiction, and he’s currently serving a 10-year prison sentence. Reserve guard Aaron Price was killed in a carjacking in 1998. Small forward Baskerville Holmes committed a murder-suicide in 1997 and assistant coach Larry Finch suffered a series of strokes that left him debilitated. However, a bit of healing seemed to be on tap in in 2008, when John Calipari had the Tigers positioned to win the national title. Unfortunately, that great run would later be scrapped from the record books as Memphis was given three years probation by the NCAA for, former star player, Derrick Rose’s fraudulent SAT score and the $1,700 in free travel and lodging provided to his brother. Before penalties were levied, Calipari bolted to Kentucky, which could soon find its way onto this list—the athletic program has six major infractions and the basketball program narrowly escaped the death penalty in 1989.


(This article was reprinted via courtesy of associatesdegree.com).

Jim Tressel: Your Only "Fear" Was Getting Caught—Period

Listen, full disclosure here, this post is not an attempt at being fair or balanced. No, the approach here is simple: to call a spade a spade. 

Upon reading Jim Tressel's "apology" for failing to report the violations of his players—which, by the way, if you're buying that whole "feared for their safety argument", then I have a wonderful piece of sandy real estate in the north pole to sell you—I only have two observations: 1) Tressel is only sorry he got caught, and 2) Tressel is about as honest as an Amway salesperson if he tries to spin it any other way.

While I won't profess to know all of Tressel's intentions, his decision to withhold information about  the impermissible activities of his players cannot be accepted as an omission prompted by any so-called "fear" of restitution by any third-party. On the contrary, based on the emails exchanged between Tressel and the informant, his players engaged in the behavior, willingly, on multiple occasions—at some points even soliciting Mr. Rife via cell phone contact—and Tressel's response didn't seem to elicit anything more than a passing curiosity as to how he might curb their behavior.

At the press conference, Tressel stated "I have had a player murdered. I've had a player incarcerated. I've had a player get taken into the drug culture and lose his opportunity for a productive life...it was obviously tremendously concerning. Quite honestly, I was scared."

Well, not to sound insensitive, but there are more than a handful of coaches in the college football ranks who share in that experience with Tressel—it explains nothing.

And, even if anyone was naive enough to buy Tressel's stab at emotional sympathy, those same persons would be smart to ask the following question: why not blow the whistle on the whole enchilada once the shady dealings were finally exposed in January? Surely if there were ever a time to let the information highway flow freely, it was then because, well, the cat was out of the bag. Yet, instead, he continued to keep the information to himself—why?

I'll tell you why, he kept it a secret for the same reason then as he did in April of 2010,  he knew he was in deep crapola if any one found out. He was simply trying to protect his and his players backsides—nothing more.

However, the more appalling behavior, in my opinion, comes not from Tressel (unfortunately, dirty coaches appear to be in fashion right now), but from the Ohio State administration in general. Do they honestly believe that a two game suspension coupled with a $250,000 fine is enough?...Seriously?

First of all, the Buckeyes play scrub one and scrub two in the first two games, so it's not like Tressel would have done much coaching in the first place and, furthermore, university president, Gordon Gee, sounds like he's just moments away from grabbing a set of knee pads for ol' Jimmy (good grief, Mr. Gee, could you BE anymore of a sniffer, "I'm just hoping the coach doesn't dismiss me."...is this guy for real?), so it wouldn't surprise me if the $250,000 fine doesn't come out of Tressel's pockets—per se.

NCAA President, Marc Emmert, has already proven to be a complete moron in the way he handles such blatant violations as this one (see Cam Newton as well as the Ohio State Five), so all eyes will be on him again with this latest turn of events and, for his sake, I hope he finds some intelligence in making a ruling on a real punishment for The Ohio State University.

They should be forced to forfeit the entire 2010 season and Jim Tressel should, in my homer humble opinion, be required to sit out more than just a couple of meaningless football games in 2011. The stuff should hit the fan for Ohio State and, if it doesn't, expect most of hell to not only break loose, but to take up permanent residence in Indianapolis—starting with the office of the president. 

Related articles

• Jim Tressel's success leads to missteps (aol.sportingnews.com)

Mark Emmert: Either You Don't Get It Or You're Just Plain Ignorant

Mark Emmert never ceases to amaze the masses with his gift of diplomacy.

In an article, published today, by CBSSports.com, Emmert is quoted to have said the following regarding the whole Cam Newton debacle:

"...Getting it right is often in the eye of the beholder. The cases we saw this fall were highly controversial and highly debatable. I understand that, and some of them were even enormously frustrating to me.

"I said very loud and clear that I think it's absolutely a fundamentally wrong for a father to try to sell the services of his son or daughter to the highest bidder, to a university. We ought never to allow that to happen, but yet, having not anticipated that, we didn't have any rule or structure that said it was a violation of any of our rules. I found that grossly inappropriate that didn't have a structure in which we could say, 'No, you can't do that.' [emphasis added].

"There was no evidence that money had changed hands and there was no evidence that Auburn University had anything to do with it. We would up making a decision that felt to many people morally objectionable, but that fit the facts and the circumstances.

"We find ourselves making those kinds of judgment calls often." 

Is this guy serious, or what? Correct me, anyone, if I'm wrong, but didn't Southern Methodist University receive the NCAA's "death penalty" for paying players—both on their roster and prospectively as recruits?

Does that not count as a precedent? Surely if a university is not allowed to give money to it's players, then said players handlers should not be allowed to seek payment from the university in order to secure that player's services—it's not a tough jump for a logical person to make.

Granted, there is nothing in the rules that says "parents can't pimp players" but, come on, some of this stuff is common sense and, if nothing else, the act of allowing a "pay-for-play" scheme to go unpunished simply because you want to protect the NCAA's tarnished image under your watch—yes, this means you Mr. Emmert—is an act of irresponsibility.

Emmert certainly has his hands full now, what with all the loopholes people will start to find in the vague, prejudicial rules of the NCAA, but he can thank himself for making his life a lot more difficult at the top.

Related articles

• Mark Emmert, flailing away (blutarsky.wordpress.com)
• NCAA president Mark Emmert pledges transparency in wake of Cam Newton scandal (sports.espn.go.com)
• NCAA president: Tougher parent rules needed (seattletimes.nwsource.com)

EA Sports and The NCAA: You Made Your Bed, Now You May Have To Lie In It

I'm no lawyer and there won't be any self-righteous spouting of what the law states and how said law should or could be interpreted—I'm simply not an expert in that arena. However, Sam Keller's lawsuit  against the NCAA and EA Sports does interest me a bit because of the far-reaching effect it could have on college football. 

In a nutshell, Keller—the former star quarterback for Arizona State—is suing EA Sports and the NCAA for monies received as a result of using his likeness in their popular NCAA college football game.

For years, the NCAA has shared "...undisclosed royalties with the NCAA for use of college stadiums, team names and uniforms and the players' images..." while the players, themselves, receive nada.

The case will be argued on this Tuesday in Pasadena and revolves around a ruling made more than a year ago by Judge Claudia Wilken that rejected the notion that the images used in the popular EA Sports games should be protected under the First Amendment.

EA's lawyers argued, at that time, that the depictions are used to "...create works of art much in the same way authors, filmmakers and songwriters insert real people in novels, movies and songs."

Judge Wilken contended that the images were not "transformed" enough to be considered art and, therefore, EA is liable to the plaintiff—in this particular, case, Sam Keller—for damages.

Apparently, under the transformative defense, "a work is considered protected by the First Amendment if it contains "significant transformative elements" or "the value of the work does not derive primarily from the celebrity's fame." 

Obviously, by using all the same characteristics of each player—i.e. height, weight, jersey number, hometown, and college team—EA is not exactly transforming anything. In fact, the only thing missing from the game's version of these players is the name itself which, to be honest, can be altered by the player after purchase.

In other words, EA isn't fooling anyone with their intent. 

So, if that defense holds, what will it mean for the thousands of players who have been basking in the glow of an empty hand for years? Will the NCAA and EA be forced to fork over millions of dollars to not only former players, but current ones as well, for profiting off their likenesses?


That's hard to say at this juncture, but a ruling against the NCAA and EA could open the barn door wide open for other athletes looking to cash in.

Should college athletes be allowed to make money off their names—especially if the NCAA is making billions off of them each year—and be granted the opportunity to say "yes or no" to being marketed and sold against their better judgment? Maybe. Some might say the athlete is already getting paid enough. After all, they receive free room and board, a full scholarship, medical attention, and many outside perks that many will never garner.

However, isn't there a catch-22 inherent in that situation? Don't the universities, at least at competitive Division-I institutions, recoup a great bit of that investment through television and licensing deals that dwarf the actual cost of the scholarship itself?

Doesn't one hand simply wash the other?

Don't misunderstand, I am not about to start advocating issuing paychecks to athletes—there could be a lot more negatives in that than some can imagine—but I am not against seeing a trust fund being made available for them after they've finished their playing careers—that's something that could be particularly helpful for guys who don't have a shot at the pro level.

It's a suit that definitely bears watching, but it's possible that EA has seen it's luck run out on this one—it could finally be time for them to pay the piper or, in this case, the player.

What say you?

Related articles

• Former NCAA player's suit threatens Hollywood (seattletimes.nwsource.com)

Georgia Bulldogs: Former QB Prospect, Logan Gray, Will Transfer

Logan Gray will no longer play for the University of Georgia.

The former quarterback prospect who began the 2010 campaign as a possible candidate for the starting QB position, only to be moved to wide receiver/flanker once Aaron Murray was named, has decided to take his degree (which he will be awarded in May) and seek out another school at which to use his remaining eligibility (he has one year remaining).

According to DawgPost.com, Gray wants to play his final season at a school closer to his home of Columbia, MO so that his family can come to his games.

I'll admit that I am uncertain if the same loophole that allowed Jeremiah Masoli to play at Ole Miss in 2010 will apply to Gray but, if it does, the NCAA waiver would come with the caveat that the University of Georgia doesn't offer an advanced degree in whatever field he hopes to obtain his Masters.

Would that open the door for him to play for the University of Missouri who, coincidentally, just lost their starting quarterback? Just an idea, nothing confirmed or heard about that possibility as it is just as likely that Gray could go the Division-II route.

Either way, you have to wish the kid nothing but the best. He gave his all at Georgia and it's too bad the coaching staff could never find a spot for him.

He finished last season with 105 receiving yards and things appeared to be looking up in 2011, especially with both A.J. Green and Kris Durham moving on, but his departure will leave Georgia even thinner at receiver, and will put a lot more pressure on guys like Marlon Brown and Rantavious Wooten to, finally, live up to their potential.

College Football: Arkansas Legislators Want New Rules After Newton Scandal

It looks like the lawmakers of Arkansas want to see some major changes in the way sports-agents are penalized for "rogue" behavior—at least by their state.

According to published reports, Attorney General Dustin McDaniel is introducing new legislation that would make it a "Class D felony for agents or their representatives to induce student-athletes to sign a contract by furnishing goods or services of value".

The bill would also "make it illegal for parents or others to seek the same illegal financial benefits in exchange for the promise of a student-athlete's commitment to a college or university athletic program."

Hmmm, sounds like Mr. McDaniel may not be too happy that his alma mater's (no surprise here, it's the University of Arkansas) shot at BCS glory was thwarted by a team many still feel was winning games with a dirty player who should have been deemed ineligible—Auburn.

Not that this was his only motivation for pushing the bill—sponsored by David J. Sanders—said McDaniel,

"Sports agents need to know that we in Arkansas will not tolerate them coming into our state, breaking the law, and jeopardizing the future of our student-athletes...further, we're going to make sure that our kids aren't used as pawns by their parents or others who think they can get away with selling their services to the highest bidder."

Wow, that language sure sounds pointed, no? He goes on to say,

"NCAA penalties could cost the hotel owner in Fayetteville or the convenience store owner in Jonesboro, all because of the actions of some unethical sports agent from outside the state...we support this legislation because we want our local economies to thrive and we want our student-athletes and our universities to be protected. It just makes for a better experience all around when everybody plays by the rules."

Well, not for nothing, Mr. McDaniel, but your head coach isn't exactly a saint himself—just saying.

If put into place, the penalties could be pricey if an agent or agent-representative is found in violation. The current penalty is $50,000 per offense, that would increase to $250,000 under this new law.

College Football: Forget Integrity, We Just Want The Money

After the story broke about Ohio State players selling their jerseys and accepting favors, many of us watched and waited to see what the all-mighty NCAA would do to punish the players and the university—at the very least we expected the six offenders to sit for the Sugar Bowl.

Well, what happened instead is yet another example of how the NCAA is just another bully masquerading as an organization of order.

Ohio State was given the option of delaying suspensions until the start of the 2011 season, and now that the representatives of the Sugar bowl have spoken, we know why—money.

Said Sugar Bowl CEO, Paul
Hoolahan,

"I made the point that anything that could be done to preserve the integrity of this year's game, we would greatly appreciate it...that appeal did not fall on deaf ears, and I'm extremely excited about it, that the Buckeyes are coming in at full strength and with no dilution."

Must be nice.

While it's easy to understand Hoolahan's motives—he is a business man after all—it's less easy to explain away the obvious double-standard of the NCAA in this case.

Are they the governing body of college football or not?

A.J. Green sat four games for selling his jersey, Anthony Dasher missed four for taking a $1500 loan, and last season, Dez Bryant missed most of his final season for talking to Deion Sanders...but Ohio State gets the option of delaying punishment because some bowl official doesn't want another lackluster BCS game on his hands?

Nice job of getting tough, Mr. Emmert. Here we thought you were bringing balance to the NCAA—as it's new president—but as it turns out, you just brought a bigger checkbook.

What a joke.

NCAA Clears Cam Newton, But Punishes Father—What The Hell?

Here's the gist of the NCAA's conversation with Cam Newton on Tuesday:

NCAA Representative: Your daddy, Cecil, asked for money. 

Cam Newton: I don't know anything about that, sir. 

NCAA Rep: Alrighty then, now that we've cleared that up—good luck on Saturday.

Okay, maybe it didn't happen quite like that, but you have to wonder what the hell the NCAA was thinking when they decided Cam Newton was free of any guilt. Honestly, not to say that any of us were flies on the wall, but Newton's decision to attend Auburn was made by his father—that's been documented.

That said, how likely is it that Cam knew nothing about what his daddy was doing with Mississippi State? Does the NCAA really expect a rational individual to believe that Cecil Newton was pimping his son to the highest bidder, yet his son didn't realize he was being pimped?

If they do, then that's naivete to the fullest extent.

In addition, what kind of horrific precedence does this decision leave for the rest of college football's "amateur" athletes. Should they all just start using the Shaggy defense whenever they're approached about a potential scandal—just say, "it wasn't me":



Seriously, if Auburn saw fit to deem him ineligible on Monday, then there was plenty enough there to keep him that way for more than just 48-hours. This same NCAA took three weeks to investigate A.J. Green's jersey incident, yet they need less than three days to deem Cam Newton fit to play—even with knowledge that his father was soliciting money on his behalf.

That's ridiculous.

If Cam Newton was unaware of what his daddy was doing, fine, then in all honesty, he shouldn't be penalized. However, that's not how the NCAA claims to work. Ignorance of wrong-doing doesn't exempt you from punishment—or so they say. 

In response to the NCAA's decision, SEC Commissioner, Mike Slive had this to say, "The conduct of Cam Newton’s father and the involved individual is unacceptable and has no place in the SEC or in intercollegiate athletics...the actions taken by Auburn University and Mississippi State University make it clear this behavior will not be tolerated in the SEC."

(scratches head)...How exactly does it do that, Mike? All this proves is that if you're doing well and making the NCAA, and the SEC a ton of money, we're willing to overlook your transgressions. If Auburn were 0-11, and not in the BCS picture, would the outcome have been as favorable?

Lets be honest here, this is as much about the SEC maintaining its foothold as it is about doing things the right way. The NCAA, the SEC, nor the Heisman Trophy committee give a rats patoot about Cam Newton or his daddy. They just don't want another Reggie Bush situation on their hands this soon—they're protecting themselves from the negative backlash such a decision could have caused.

Nothing more.

Shame on them all for being the biggest pimps in college football.

One thing is certain, if Auburn goes on to win this weekend and compete for a national title, there will be changes to the NCAA's rules prior to the 2011 season. The loopholes their mind-boggling act leaves in its wake are too obvious to be overlooked, and they cannot allow them to remain if they expect any integrity to be maintained in this sport.

That is, of course, assuming there ever was any.

Related articles

• NCAA clears Auburn star Cam Newton to play (cnn.com)

Auburn Fans Respond: Nick Fairley Was Just Doing His Job (VIDEO)

Ya know, this would be funnier if it weren't so dead wrong. Of course, have to admit, the dialogue does give a slight chuckle in some places—particularly the "All Auburn fans should be killed" retort by the "Georgia" fan.

For the most part, though, it just amazes me how differently two sides can see a ball game.



Here's to killing Auburn, on the football field, next year in Athens!

Related articles

• Nick Fairley Won't Face Suspension For Hit On Aaron Murray (sbnation.com)

Beware Auburn Fans! The Cam Newton Smear Campaign Is In Full Effect

Boy, that Cam Newton sure has a lot of "haters" all of a sudden.

If it's not FoxSports.com's, Thayer Evans, urging voters to leave Newton off their Heisman ballots, then it's the Orlando Sentinel grabbing onto whatever negative stories they can find to discredit Newton's season.

There's so much mud-slinging going going on with this kid right now, you'd think he was running for a political office.

To be fair to the vitriol-spewing media, we have to admit that some trepidation in voting for Newton will be present. Based on the pay-for-play allegations and the newest dagger that accuses Newton of academic cheating while he was at Florida (although given the fact that Thayer Evans wrote the article, you have to wonder how much truth there is to the account), some voters are bound to be getting a little gun-shy.

That said, it doesn't seem fair to penalize the kid for unproven actions—we have seen proof of nothing, yet, so why risk your credibility grasping at the whispers?


If Newton ends up being blameworthy of either, or both, of the allegations then, by all means, re-evaluate his worthiness for receiving any post-season accolades.


Until then, let the NCAA do their job, let Newton continue his season, and refrain from damaging the reputation of a, to this point, innocent young man.

Cam Newton: Paid or Not...It Was All About What Daddy Wanted

ESPN.com has reported that Auburn quarterback, Cam Newton, was offered to Mississippi State for the sum of $180,000. That was the discounted price that Kenneth Rogers (a supposed associate acting on behalf of Newton's camp) was willing to accept in exchange for Newton's signature on a letter of intent.

Newton, it's no secret, was going to Mississippi State. He liked Dan Mullen and felt comfortable with the Bulldogs. Many fans and boosters of the program were touting Newton as a done deal and felt secure that there was no way he would sign elsewhere.

Well, unfortunately for them, they didn't count on the influence that Newton's father, Cecil, had in the decision.
In an interview given after Cam Newton decided to sign with Auburn, his father gave his reasons for why he didn't feel Mississippi State was the place for his son:

"...They (Mississippi State) just don't have all the moving parts. Cam was going to have to be the star. He'd have to do everything himself. I didn't want him to be a rented mule. Auburn has far more varsity players returning, they have more skill players, they're attracting more highly recruited players and it's right down the street."

So, location and talent level played a part but, correct if wrong, isn't Newton a "rented mule" at Auburn? Seriously, does anyone really believe that the Tigers would be 9-0 without him as their quarterback?

Yet, no need to digress.

Mr. Newton didn't bother to stop there with his comments. When asked point blank if the Bulldogs were Cam's choice, he says the following:

"Absolutely they were. Auburn came on strong at the end. A lot of people pre-supposed that (Cam) would hook up with Dan Mullen. He made an official visit around Thanksgiving and that went really well. I just wasn't sure about it. I like Dan Mullen and I think he has a very bright offensive mind. He's just having to go against the odds in Starkville. I just didn't want Cam to be blinded by an affiliation."

Daddy Newton held all the cards in this situation and Cam had very little choice in the matter.  With that being said, you have to wonder if there is any validity to the rumors—especially when you start throwing in allegations about a sinking church and a pastor who is suddenly able to guarantee that all will be well within six months.

ESPN reports that "Cecil Newton said the family received a letter from the NCAA "about a month ago" asking for financial statements. He said he submitted bank statements and records for the church where he is pastor, Holy Zion Center of Deliverance in Newnan, Ga., along with other records."

The only question worth asking about the above information is how much did Mr. Newton divulge in turning over the financial statements of Holy Zion? It may seem like an ignorant question to ask, but, what if the money were received in cash or via an anonymous donor?

Better still, if he's involved with five other churches, why not siphon the money through another of his ministries? Wouldn't that make Holy Zion's financial statements irrelevant?

Hopefully this story turns out to be a whole lot of hogwash and innuendo based on a wild rumor, started by a disgruntled party. But, where the NCAA has been concerned this season—where there is smoke, there's fire.

No doubt more information will be forthcoming but for Auburn, and Cam Newton, this little distraction can't be fun to have with an undefeated season, a Heisman Trophy, and a potential spot in the BCS Championship all, seemingly, on the line. 

Related articles

• Meet Cam Newton's Father, Cecil Newton (sbnation.com)

College Football Debate: To Pay or Not To Pay—Should There Be A Question?

By now, most everyone has either read or heard about the interview that, Josh Luchs gave to Sports Illustrated regarding his time as a sports agent. It's an interesting read, chocked full of all types of tidbits that make you raise an eyebrow at just how seedy the world of college athletics can truly be— when no one is watching.

However, after finishing the article, only one question can possibly come to mind: Should the NCAA allow amateur athletes to be paid or not?

The question is simple enough, but the answer is more complicated than any could possibly imagine because there is no black and white response to a query that has so many shades of gray. Of course the hard-line response would be to say that athletes are paid already—via their cushy $100,000 plus scholarship.

While the majority of college graduates will exit with a mountain of debt, most athletes will exit not only debt free, but with a degree that will be worth something in the job market, and a level of recognition that, depending on where they live, will grant them an opportunity to find a career that pays well.

Think about the sheer number of former athletes who find their way into the broadcast booth, onto the radio, and linked to lucrative business offers just for the use of their name and image—mostly because they played football or basketball.

There are benefits to being a successful collegiate athlete—even if you aren't an all-conference player who manages to garner a pro contract.

That said, the NCAA, and the institutions that these athletes serve, are also getting paid. The A.J. Green incident shed new light on the fact that a college athlete is powerless to what they can do for monetary gain. He sold his jersey for $1,000 and, while he was wrong for doing so, the NCAA sells a replica of his jersey for—at minimum—$50.00.

Look around Sanford Stadium and count the number of No. 8 jerseys—how many do you see? Is it more than a $1,000 worth—does Green get a cut of that? Did Reggie Bush reap the benefits of his No. 5? I bet Tim Tebow could have paid for a lot of circumcisions with his No. 15—just putting that out there.

Furthermore, look at the video game industry, they've struck gold with NCAA football series—the recently released NCAA 11' football sales increased 8% over the previous version. Keeping that in mind, it has to sting a little when a popular college football player sees their jersey number, but not their name, featured amongst the 100-plus schools the game promotes—knowing that most fans will know exactly who they are on said game.

And then there's the issue with players accepting monies, gifts, or favors. If they do so, there are steep consequences attached. Yet, the NCAA expects them to get by only on what they are allowed to have under the guidelines: tuition, books, meals, and on-campus housing are covered. However, there are no stipends given to cover other non-academic expenses: clothing, entertainment, etc.

Many of these athletes are poor and don't have the means to do anything.

Sure, the NCAA allows them to work but, let's be honest, what student-athlete has the time to fit a job into their daily commitments? Between practice, training, classes, tutoring-sessions, and study time, there isn't enough time in the day to hold down a job?

So, that leaves the athlete to depend on his/her family for any extra expenses and most cannot afford to do so.

That said, there will be some athletes who will take advantage of their popularity by accepting money and gifts from an agent, a booster, or an overzealous fan. Is that the right thing to do? No, but, despite what the NCAA has to say about why student-athletes aren't paid, there is a need for further discussion on how to best address these matters.

The debate is one that has so many angles that it's difficult to tackle them all, but it's anything but black and white—it always has been.

What say you?

The NCAA Don't Need No Stinking Investigators...TMZ Will Do Just Fine

Who needs to investigate the wrongdoings of the collegiate athlete when you can just find a cheap tabloid television show to do it for you?

The fact that A.J. Green jeopardized his season for a few extra spring break ducats was a lot less surprising than his mention of TMZ being the initial impetus of the NCAA's investigation into his actions.

Said A.J., "I didn’t know anything about it, Green said of the party. "When the NCAA told me about it, they said they heard it from [website] TMZ. [The NCAA] just heard it was a rumor, so they came down here and asked me." (AJC, 9/28/10).

In case you have no idea what TMZ actually is, it's a celebrity gossip site known for being very unfriendly to famous people. If tabloid journalism had rungs, TMZ would fall somewhere between US Weekly and The Enquirer—in other words, it's pretty close to garbage.

So, it seems rather comical that the NCAA has agents patrolling cheesy tabloid websites for information on what the college athletes they get paid to keep tabs on are doing. It makes you question their ability to actually find out anything major, that's not self-reported by the institution, on their own.

Perhaps that's why it took them five years to figure out that Reggie Bush was dirty, North Carolina was paying tutors, and South Carolina players were living in hotels—jeez, Marc Emmert (the new NCAA president) has a lot of work left to do if he expects to streamline that operation.

Adding more insult to injury was the fact that the NCAA investigation into A.J. Green's actions continued long after it was established that he wasn't in attendance at the South Beach party. Why was that even necessary? Just thinking out loud here, but, wasn't that the reason for the inquiry in the first place? He was rumored to have been there and—shocker—the rumor turns out to be a fabrication.

Why then mull over his bank statements from the previous 15-months?

Did the NCAA agent feel a little silly coming away empty-handed after their "source" ended up being complete hogwash? Did it then become necessary to find something—anything—to justify their contacting Green in the first place? If that wasn't case, why didn't they just leave well enough alone?

Unfortunately for Green, they did unearth his dirty, little secret. One that he, admittedly, knew was wrong but didn't properly calculate the consequences of after the fact.

It's all over now, thankfully, and Georgia can see what restitution Green can  repay the Bulldogs on the football field. Georgia offensive coordinator, Mike Bobo, is already foaming at the mouth trying to come up with better plays than the slants, draws, and iso's he's been blindly running over the last three weeks.

Even still, it's perplexing to think that the NCAA expects anyone to take them seriously when they rely on such trashy mediums as TMZ to point them in the right direction—Seriously?

You know that somewhere, someone is thinking, "if not for that POS (piece of shhhh) website, Georgia could be 4-0 right now", right?...just putting that out there because someone is thinking it—no doubt.

As for the NCAA, when asked about the allegation that they don't have agents who can find their own dirt, minus the help of entertainment news, they had no comment. 

Georgia vs South Carolina 1980: Herschel Walker vs George Rogers (VIDEO)

In anticipation of the noon showdown between the Georgia Bulldogs and the South Carolina Gamecocks, it seemed fitting to flashback to another great match-up from the past—this one is from the 1980 National Championship season.

Both Georgia and South Carolina came into the game undefeated, and both featured great running backs in the Herschel Walker—the true freshman—and George Rogers. The game was telecast on a national level and garnered a ton of interest. As Dooley would say in the video, this is the game that took Herschel from a regional attraction to a national superstar.

Georgia won the game 13-10. 

(h/t to ghostoferkrussell) Just a little sidenote: the run by Walker at the 3:15 mark is amazing—wow.



And, just for kicks, here is the piece that ABC did on Herschel prior to the start of the game (h/t apgarbin). It's astonishing to recall just how dominant Herschel was in high school—talk about having some NCAA "create a player" numbers*—my god, a freshman!



Georgia won't have a Herschel Walker on the field today, but hopefully the outcome will be the same—DAWGS WIN! DAWGS WIN! DAWGS WIN!

GATA!!!

*A little nod to my Twitter buddy, @rodimusprime for coining that analogy.