Auburn Football: 10 Takeaways from HBO's Real Sports Exposé

Originally, the only news that broke after the screening of the HBO special on corruption in college sports and whether college players should be paid were negative pieces against the Auburn football team. While there was a blatant focus on allegations brought against Auburn even though other schools were named, some other conclusions that rose from the exposé seemed almost feasible.

If you tuned in to the special, some of the points that were raised had to at least peak your interest. There were multiple times that I found myself agreeing with each panelist for numerous reasons. However, the majority of the special seemed to be targeting one part of college football or another.

There were some takeaways that came from the special that left the audience with questions and conclusions. Whatever was learned seemed to lead to more questions nonetheless.

Could a semi-pro elite league be feasible?

One of the arguments that continue to be made is that college athletes need to be paid. If you pay the players some sort of salary, that will surely end the corruption that is sure to be in college football. But what will determine how much players get paid and what sports get the money?

So many questions come along with the suggestion to pay athletes. There would be no feasible way to pay all sports; it would have to remain the sports that are not only self-sufficient but also the programs that have the power to prop up athletic departments, insert football.

The question would remain of equality and determining which teams could participate in a semi-pro style league. Not all college football bowl schools make enough money to pay their players. Only the most elite programs from the elite conferences would be able to compete in the paid leagues.

The same goes for college basketball. Not all programs in NCAA basketball could afford to pay their athletes. Again, the elite league scenario must occur.

All these things being said, the BCS conference would get much smaller and 50 or so schools could survive the payment of the athletes. This would create an elite level of competition in college football and basketball.

Would fans support the action of paid college players? At that point do you require the athletes to attend school? Would that go away as a part of the compensation or would scholastics be included in the scholarship stipulations? Again, with so many questions and so few answers, paid athletes in college athletics seem to be a ways off if ever.

The system that built itself

College football has found itself in a paradox as of late. Do what it takes to win, or seemingly become mediocre. In recruiting it doesn’t have to be that you’re paying players or giving improper benefits, but simply that you’re pushing the limit.

If you dig around any major football program, there is no doubt a group of teams in each conference that makes new rules happen so that the NCAA can try and ensure that their recruiting edge isn’t used any longer. The NCAA tries to keep the game even; good recruiters try and make the NCAA change the rules.

More regulation tends to lead to more rules being broken as an over-governing can occur. The more our teams and coaches push the line however the more the fans of these schools want. Fans all want the number one recruiting class, but are they really willing to sacrifice anything, including integrity to get there?

The system of college football and basketball for that matter seems to have built itself. The major boosters and contributors to these programs want results. Fans want results and anyway they get athletes on campus is all that matters. Win games and just don’t ask many questions.

Can you regulate extra benefits?

If the conclusion is that paying players of major revenue producing sports is a must and a feasible idea, how can you regulate extra benefits? Would it matter if endorsement deals would be made with teenagers? Where would the line be able to be drawn for what agents or others were able to give to the athletes?

One major piece of the puzzle would have to be contracts for the players. In those contracts, agreements outside of just salaries would have to be accommodated for. There would need to be contract negotiations and even possibly a need for a collective bargaining agreement. Would college athletes then form their own union?

Again so many questions seem to rise when the discussion of compensation really starts. If it were allowed, regulating any other benefits would be difficult at best. It would be open season for companies on these players.

Should players be compensated for their likeness?

One point that was raised in the special that was very interesting is: should the players be compensated for the use of their image? The example that was shown was video games that had throw back teams on them. Tyrone Prothro was one of the players that were mentioned as being a part of the lawsuit for compensation.

Prior to the video game explosion, this did not seem to be a charging issue where former players were taking companies to court. Prior to the gaming age, there were scattered paintings of old players but not much more.

With the influx of millions of dollars to the sports gaming industry in the past decade, some players feel that they deserve compensation for their images to be used. As this continues to catch fire, it will raise yet another issue of compensation to current players. If former players receive funds, do the players themselves receive funds during their playing years or perhaps receive compensation after no longer attending their institution.

The NCAA has each player sign a waiver giving his or her likeness rights to the NCAA, but does that make it fair for the NCAA to sell those images to companies and receive profit? One thing is for sure, if former players begin to be compensated for appearing in games and the like, current players will want theirs as well.

Scholarship programs have holes

As you look across the landscape of college sports, there is an ever-changing environment. One of the changes that seem to not follow is scholarship programs. These programs give aid to students that are attending the universities and colleges and most pay for tuition, room and board. The issue is where is the extra pay for these athletes?

There is no time for these players to get jobs during season and there is no way for most to get jobs out of season either. If you want to keep players from seeking out extra benefits and from being susceptible to street agents, give them a little compensation.

The system is failing and has cracks all over the surface. Everyone notices the issues. If you bring in players that are trying to live by the rules but the rules seem to be a bit porous, it is hard to give a firm interpretation on whether they can even take a summer job.

As times change in preparation, so needs to be a change in compensation. Adding a living stipend could fix most issues. Adding the stipend would add benefit but not build a paid player role and would keep that argument sequestered.

Football recruiting is going the route of Basketball recruiting

One trend that has occurred as of late has been the growth of seven on seven camps nationwide. Numerous cities host the camps and college campuses have gotten in the fold. These seven on seven leagues in some parts have taken on the role of regulation football.

As this has become a good way for athletes to be recognized, it also is a way for corruption to enter the game even more easily than before. A big concern for college basketball has become the AAU programs. Some are sure to be legitimately run programs. There are some that are sure to be compensation schemes.

The same goes for the seven on seven camps. They are not in and of themselves bad; they're the new way that the street agents and “coaches” have taken the reigns of decisions in young men’s lives that should be determined by family, not the “coach” selling film. These camps are leading to more avenues for corruption in the college ranks if regulation doesn’t start at that level.

Auburn has concerns, but as of now nothing to lose sleep over

Everyone can read about previous encounters schools have had with the NCAA. It has been since 1992 that Auburn has had a major violation that has occurred. As of late they have been in the spotlight however and the expose that occurred on HBO did everything to fuel more questions for the Auburn program.

As of this weekend, Stanley McClover, one of accusers, spoke with the NCAA and reportedly gave no names of anyone that he encountered and received funds from. No boosters have been named and the coach implicated by Troy Reddick has not been named.

Until the players that have made these accusations come out with names or evidence, this will be just one more thing of irritation and setback for this Auburn program.

No one wants to “fix” college football

For all the issues that are raised with college football, no one wants to truly fix the problems. If HBO had a true interest in cleaning the system they paint as so corrupt, they would have taken their investigation beyond the borders of Auburn University.

If the NCAA wanted to ensure that system was revamped, they would hire regulators for every major universities athletics department. Medical hardships would be examined in greater detail and follow up programs for players to finish degrees would be more successful. There are things that can be done but as long as the focus is on winning, there will be players lost to the system.

There are ways for players to always benefit themselves and many universities do attempt to help their former players or injured players but far too many get left behind.

As long as school presidents run the BCS it will favor auto qualifiers

There is a problem with the way that the BCS system works. Most don’t agree with the effectiveness of the system as is, but it has matched the best teams the majority of occasions and it has been the only effective national championship system in college football.

With the BCS, however, we have seen recent corruption in the Fiesta Bowl and money that flows to the major conferences. This system favors the major conferences with the largest revenue streams but that system also is ran by the presidents of those schools.

Until there is a neutral party in control of the board at the BCS, it will never be a fair game for all the schools playing in the bowl system. What the BCS system could do, however, is assist the ability of a semi-pro league to build its frame around. Whatever the future is, the BCS will have to be rearranged.

The future looks bright for college football and basketball

Despite all of the negatives that this exposé seemed to focus on, there were some bright spots. You saw a former coach in Rich Rodriguez express hope as he spoke as a member of the panel. College football and basketball following is skyrocketing.

Revenue for these two sports is rising as is exposure. With all of this comes a responsibility to the fans and players that the game stays clean and fair. Regulations need to change. An effort has to be made for the NCAA to clean up some of these recent recruiting services.

If the NCAA can move forward and prove to move with the times, it may catch up with the sports that it attempts to regulate. Until then, the best it can do is try and adapt but the future looks bright as the fan base and revenues grow year in and year out.

**What’s your thoughts? What stood out to you as a viewer and can these sports change for the better or is it too late?**