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)

College Football ATS Picks: Can Nevada Stop Boise State's Winning Streak?

The Lady fared a bit better last week—thank goodness—going 10-5 on the day and moving the overall record to 66-69. The drive towards a strong finish ends with this week's slate, so let's not waste any more time.

Most lines are courtesy of VegasInsider.com (the Auburn/Alabama line is from Vegas.com since VegasInsider.com had no line as of late Thursday evening) and are current as of Thanksgiving Day.

1. West Virginia at Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh (-3)

This game is hard to predict, honestly, because both teams have shown they can be either really good or dreadfully bad. That said, the home field advantage has to be the difference here.

The Lady's Pick: Pittsburgh to cover.

2. Louisville at Rutgers: Louisville (-3)

Both teams enter this game with a losing streak and only one of them will have a bowl bid to gain by winning.

The Lady's Pick: Louisville to cover.

3. Auburn at Alabama: Alabama (-4.5)

Auburn is good, there is no way around that fact, and no team has had an answer for Cam Newton this season. As good as the Alabama defense has shown it can be this year, it seems unlikely that they have enough left in the tank to face another team coming off a bye week with a ton of momentum and an eye towards the brass ring.

The Lady's Pick: Auburn to cover.

4. UCLA at Arizona State: Arizona State (-12.5)

UCLA has not played well on the road and Arizona State seems to play at another level inside Sun Devil Stadium—remember how tight they played Oregon?

The Lady's Pick: Arizona State to cover.

5. Colorado at Nebraska: Nebraska (-16.5)

Sure, the Buffaloes manhandled Iowa State last week but, let's face it, Iowa State isn't nearly as good as advertised and Colorado is really this bad. With or without Taylor Martinez leading the charge, the Cornhuskers should have no problem controlling the tempo or the end zone in this one.

The Lady's Pick: Nebraska to cover.

6. Arizona at Oregon: Oregon (-19)

Oregon plays lights out at home. This week will not be any different.

The Lady's Pick: Oregon to cover.

7. Boise State at Nevada: Boise State (-14)

This game will actually be the biggest test Boise has faced, in-conference, all season as Nevada resembles something closer to a Division-I football team—much unlike the patsies the Broncos have come up against all year. That said, it will still be a bit surprising if the Wolfpack pulls out the win (especially given the overall dominance Boise has in this series).


The Lady's Pick: Nevada to cover.

8. Michigan at Ohio State: Ohio State (-17)

If Michigan had anything that closely resembled a defense, this game might actually be a bit closer—particularly if you could have any faith that Denard Robinson would both play and finish the game. However, given the fact that neither the latter or the former has been likely over the last few weeks, it's hard not to see Ohio State and Terrelle Pryor dominating this game.

The Lady's Pick: Ohio State to cover.


9. Indiana at Purdue: Purdue (-3)

Purdue showed some signs of life last week against a stout Michigan State team and this has to be one of those games where the bragging rights could give the Boilermakers just enough motivation to, finally, get another win.

The Lady's Pick: Purdue


10. Kentucky at Tennessee: Tennessee (-3)

Tennessee seems to have found the right guy to lead their offense in Tyler Bray, and if their defense can find a way to play hard, in an SEC contest, for the full 60 minutes, they should have no problem getting win number six on Saturday.

The Lady's Pick: Tennessee

The Lady's SUPERSIZED Luck Picks (time to go all-in to get above .500)


11. Clemson (+2.5) vs. South Carolina


12. Connecticut (-1) vs. Cincinnati

13. Wisconsin (+23) vs. Northwestern


14. Vanderbilt (-5.5) vs. Wake Forest


15. Iowa (-15.5) at Minnesota


16. Virginia Tech (+23) vs. Virginia


17. Utah (-9) vs. BYU


18. Stanford (-13.5) vs. Oregon State


19. Arkansas (-3.5) vs. LSU


20. Penn State (+1.5) vs. Michigan State

BCS Rankings: The Biggest Surprises and Mistakes of the Top 25

The BCS Poll is out and, as usual, there were some surprises—Oklahoma at No. 1...seriously? And some oversights—how on earth is Wisconsin ranked BELOW Ohio State?

In either case, the release of the poll has set into motion the conversation of what team is championship caliber. Who will rise above all and play for the coveted BCS Championship in January?

Plenty will be said about the latter between now and Christmas, but tonight we can marinate on some of the surprises and mistakes that the BCS made in choosing the 25 best teams in the nation.

The Surprises

1. If Oklahoma is the No. 1 team in the nation, then someone is drinking.

The Sooners struggled against Utah State and Air Force this season, and looked only mildly impressive against a youthful Texas Longhorn team two weeks ago. No way they should be ranked anywhere near the top spot.

2. Boise State can't get no satisfaction from the pollsters.

No doubt some figured the tumble of both Nebraska and Ohio State would grant the Broncos a shot at No. 1, but no dice. The Broncos fall to third—behind Oregon.

3. Why on earth is Wisconsin ranked behind Ohio State?

Talk about swigging some sizzurp. This is the reward the Badgers get for beating "THE" Ohio State University. Tim Brewster must know some people.

4. Virginia Tech...for real?

Adding truth to the adage: better to lose early than late, the Hokies slotted in at No. 25 in the BCS Poll.

How on earth they were more deserving of this honor than, say, Georgia Tech or Nevada is a touch perplexing. The obvious reason would have to be strength of schedule, but, if that were the case, there would no Boise in the top 5 so...again...what makes the Hokies so worthy?

5. Mississippi State—good for them.

After beating Florida—in Gainesville—there seems to be little doubt that Dan Mullen's team will go bowling this season. The Bulldogs have certainly been impressive this year.

The Mistakes

1. Ohio State should not be in the top 10.

Sure, playing cupcakes is easy but, in their first true road test of the year, they folded like  cheap suit. Ohio State is a paper champion, Pryor is not Heisman worthy, and people are still giving too much respect to the Buckeyes based on absolutely nothing.

They are not a top 10 team...don't believe the hype.

2. Iowa is too low.

They lost a close game to Arizona early on, but have played well since that time—including a 38-28 win in Ann Arbor.

The Hawkeyes deserve better than 15.

3. West Virginia at 20?

The Mountaineers might be 5-1, but, they are a "we haven't played and won against anybody" 5-1. Their one chance to prove their legitimacy—versus LSU—ended in a loss. Not sure if they are any better than the 6-1 Nevada Wolfpack team that didn't even find it's way into the poll.

What say you? Did the polls disappoint, shock, or leave your mind boggled?

Wisconsin Badgers Football: Ohio State Gets Bucked By The Badgers

The chants of "OVER-RATED" can already be heard, by the thousands, as the Wisconsin Badgers have just dethroned the, newly birthed, Ohio State Buckeyes from their spot as the No. 1 team in the country.

Terrelle Pryor went back to being the guy everyone once thought he was—mediocre and inconsistent—throwing no touchdowns and completing less than 50 percent of his passes. He wasn't the leader that people thought he became after leading the Buckeyes to that 2009 Rose Bowl win last year, but rather the guy who had trouble beating Navy, at home, to begin the 2009 season.

As for Wisconsin, they simply took the home field and used it to their advantage, as John Clay ran and powered his way to another 100 yard performance and two touchdowns.

What does this mean for Ohio State?

Well, for one, it means they will no longer be the No. 1 team in the country, but they aren't out of the game just yet, there is still plenty of time to prove that their play earlier this season was no fluke—if they can win out and avoid the lackadaisical attitude that can sometimes taint the focus of a team that has gone from undefeated to defeated.

That said, Wisconsin should be careful not to enjoy this win too much as they are still apt to trip up somewhere along the way—perhaps at Iowa next week?

Boy, this has been one crazy Saturday.

What say you? Who should be the No. 1 team come Sunday night?

A Texas to Big Ten Move Is, Perhaps, The Dumbest Thing I've Ever Heard

Why on earth would Texas consider moving to the Big Ten?

I'm perplexed by the idea and have bantied it about quite enough at this point so, I am posing the question to other common sense-filled beings—why would Texas make the jump from the Big 12 to the Big Ten?

I understand that there is money in doing so; that by adding Texas to the Big Ten, the revenue of the conference increases substantially based on their having secured every major television market that matters—save New York. I realize that the almighty dollar is at the root of all this expansion evil.

That said, I also know that Ohio State, Penn State, and Michigan aren't the only teams in the Big Ten who would be given the opportunity to play Texas if they did join. There are, after all, eight other teams that make up the Big Ten (Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan State, Northwestern, Indiana, Purdue, and Wisconsin) and nearly all of them would play Texas at some point.

So, in seriously considering that fact, be honest, who really wants to see Texas play Indiana, Minnesota, or Illinois?

I mean, because, obviously, the Longhorns would have to fill out that 13 game schedule with at least 5-6 other conference match-ups, right? You can't play the big boys every week.

There would be just as many bad match-ups in the Big Ten as there are in the Big 12. The difference would be that Texas would seem alarmingly out of place playing Minnesota as opposed to Oklahoma State.

Even more, what becomes of the Red River Rivalry? Would Oklahoma still play Texas every year?

Of course, the obvious answer is yes, since the two teams have played each other since 1900 but, if the Sooners moved to the Pac-11, which is looking to become the Pac-16, would the rivalry hold as much weight as it has since 1996 when they became part of the same conference?

After all, the 'Red River Rivalry', for many years, was the deciding factor in who would go to the Big 12 Championship Game and represent the Big 12 South; with that implication gone, would that game matter more or less to the college football fan?

Which leads to my next question: Why would Texas want to give up it's Big 12 dominance in exchange for Big Ten parity?

The Big 12 as it's configured right now is Texas, Oklahoma....and everybody else. Period. Nebraska is on the upswing and Texas Tech is always lurking but, in truth, nobody can touch Texas or Oklahoma in terms of success, recruting, or popularity in the Big 12. So why leave?

Texas doesn't need the money and they wouldn't be done any favors by joining another conference. If anything, Texas is bringing more to the table no matter where they go, so what's in it for them?

It just seems like a whole lot of trouble to go through when the formula isn't broken.

For my money, let Colorado go and be the second coming of Oregon State in the Pac-11, but where the chatter about the rest of the Big 12 jumping ship and joining other is concerned, I only have one thing to say: just don't mess with Texas.