Alleged! Alleged!! Alleged!!!

Man, this story hits on almost every sordid detail anyone who’s ever thought the worst of the Auburn football program could imagine.  (No mention of Cam, sorry.)

That being said, a lot of it doesn’t make sense – namely, why Auburn’s coaches would have had such a hard on about Mike McNeil.  And there’s already a fair amount of “he said, she said” backtracking going on.

Oh, and Will Muschamp paying McNeil $400?  In his office?  Not buying it, but I bet that’s the part of the story that winds up getting the most attention.

Advertisement

Wednesday morning buffet

Grab your plate and utensils.  (Napkins are optional.)

• California is on the verge of passing laws on student-athlete stipends that will run afoul of NCAA rules.
• In case you wanted a fashion review of Georgia’s new branding effort, here ’tis.
• Texas A&M wants Johnny Manziel to be treated just like any other student when he’s on campus.  Except for the full-time bodyguard, that is.
• Is there a Krispy Kreme in Johnson City, Tennessee?
• Good nuts and bolts interview with Vandy offensive line coach Herb Hand, if you’re interested in what that offense tries to do scheme-wise.
• And speaking of Vanderbilt’s offensive line, I didn’t realize the ‘Dores were able to redshirt their entire freshman class last year.  That’s how you build for the long haul in the SEC.  (Or anywhere, really.)
• Georgia’s players claim to have learned one lesson from the Boise State game.
• This post caused me to ask the musical question – when the day comes that gay marriage is legal in the South, will that bring more conflict with the unwritten rule about not having your wedding in the fall?  Hmm… maybe the religious right’s missing an argument here.

My God, a freshman!

Tray Matthews’ spring is something else.

So apparently a wide receiver "ran away" from safety Tray Matthews today in #UGA's practice to avoid being hit. Catcalls ensued. #headhunter

— Radi Nabulsi (@RadiNabulsi) April 3, 2013

I hear #UGA safety Tray Matthews also sent a wide receiver to the hospital with a bruised lung. Likely from the scrimmage on Saturday.

— Radi Nabulsi (@RadiNabulsi) April 3, 2013

It’s only been a couple of weeks and it’s like he’s appropriating Chuck Norris punch lines.

 

O’Bannon: another nail in D-1’s coffin?

From Andy Staples’ O’Bannon primer comes this about the possibility of a settlement:

If the class gets certified and the schools and the NCAA decide to cut a deal with the plaintiffs, the possibilities are endless. This is the most logical: The schools agree to set aside a portion of revenue — one power-conference AD I spoke to recently tossed out $2 million a year — to distribute to athletes. This money would be placed in a trust and given to the athlete only when that athlete obtains a degree.

From a practical standpoint, this would require a new NCAA subdivision. The schools of the ACC, Big 12, Big Ten, Pac-12 and SEC are the only ones that could afford such a model. This would offer them an even greater recruiting advantage than they already have over the poorer leagues. They would have to compete only amongst themselves in football. From a viewer’s standpoint, that would be fantastic. School leaders insist such a settlement would require them to distribute the money evenly among all athletes so as not to run afoul of Title IX. If so, it still wouldn’t address the issue of a select few athletes receiving significantly less than market value. It could lead to more legal action, but conversations with those on the plaintiffs’ side suggest this is a deal they’d be willing to make.[Emphasis added.] But it would cost much more than $2 million a year per school.

Assuming that logical and the NCAA isn’t an oxymoron in this setting, there is probably a number out there that both sides could live with.  But it would likely put more than a few smaller, less profitable programs out of the D-1 game, or force a wholesale rejiggering of the division to reflect the new economic realities.  As Staples writes, that’s not necessarily a bad thing for fans.  But you wonder how some politicians might feel about it, particularly if a few of the offended small fry choose to complain.

Barnhart talks to Grantham.

Once you get past the… well, conventional wisdom of Tony Barnhart’s spring piece on Georgia, there’s some meat on its bones to chew on.  Start with this stat about Grantham’s defense last season:

Statistically, last season was strange for Georgia’s defense. The Bulldogs had four starters suspended for the first two games and two of those for four games. Grantham had to mix and match players and play guys out of position to get through the first month. They gave up 478 yards to Tennessee and still won. They gave up 350 yards rushing to Alabama and still almost won. Georgia finished sixth in the SEC in total defense (357.79 yards per game) and sixth in scoring defense (16.74 points per game).

But the defense also made plays when most necessary. The Bulldogs forced 30 turnovers in 2012 (second only to LSU and Mississippi State in the SEC) and 32 the previous season. Only LSU got the ball back to its offense more often than Georgia has the past two seasons.  [Emphasis added.]

Getting the ball back to this offense is a good thing.  (And it also helps explain how Georgia could finish 32nd nationally in total defense and 19th in scoring defense.)

Barnhart also pulls an intriguing quote out of Grantham.

“We basically only had 28 guys on scholarship last year, and then we had the suspensions at the beginning of the year and that put is in a bind,” Grantham said. “[This season] We’re young and we’re going to coach them up a bit. But we’re pretty talented. We have guys who can do a lot of things. We have a bunch of guys who want to be the next Jarvis Jones.”

So he was concerned about the numbers game at the start of last season.  And he recognizes that he’s got a far different challenge this year.  You’d think that would mean he would be testing out personnel combinations all through the first part of the season to find his most productive group.  But it doesn’t sound like that’s necessarily the case.

“We pretty much have to have things set when we leave here in the spring,” Grantham said. “There is not going to be any time for experimenting when we get here in the fall. We have to get ready to play against a great offense.”

Hmm.  I’m not sure if he’s referring to players or schemes there.  If it’s the former, I’m a little skeptical, because I don’t see how some of the talent influx (particularly the JUCO kids for the secondary) don’t work their way into the mix coming out of fall camp.  Maybe it’s just his way of stressing to the ones who are here for spring practice how crucial it is.  But at least he knows what he’s got ahead of him and his defense.

Does the NCAA even bother with background checks?

At this point, it’s hard for me to see Mark Emmert as anyone more than Michael Adams with better PR skills.