There’s been much finger pointing this way regarding the Murphy Holloway situation by some Clemson fans who inhabit their team’s websites message boards. These posters believe my story on May 2nd about Holloway transferring to Clemson is the reason Holloway is not transferring to Clemson, at least not right now. They claim that story, coming out when it did, gave Ole Miss the reason it needed to say no to Holloway’s request for a release to go to Clemson. There’s just one problem with that line of thinking. There is no proof to back it up.
I wrote the headline for that story, the one that’s become the rallying cry of the haters, the one that read, “Holloway to Clemson a done deal“. That headline was dead on. On May 1st, my sources confirmed to me that Holloway was set on going to Clemson, and Clemson was ready to receive him.
All that was left was for Ole Miss to give him his release, and that was considered a formality to be completed early in the week. As I wrote, the groundwork had been laid. From Holloway’s standpoint, and that was the angle from which I was writing, the deal was done.
I also made it clear in my story that, based on my information, Clemson had had no official contact with Holloway because he had not yet been released to them. Nowhere in the story was it written that Clemson had violated any rules.
I published the story on this site the afternoon of May 2nd after double checking the information. A version of the story appeared in The State the next day. At some point after that, ESPN reported on its crawl that Holloway was transferring from Ole Miss to Clemson. ESPN did not credit the story to any other news outlet, so it obviously used its own sources for its story.
As well all know now, Ole Miss has twice denied Holloway’s request to be released to Clemson. The school has yet to say why. Athletics Director Pete Boone was quoted last week as saying they “heard some drumbeats about Clemson.” But what does that mean? Is he saying he believes there was tampering? If so, did he learn about thIs directly, or did he take the news reports of Holloway’s plans to transfer to Clemson as evidence? I don’t know. You don’t know. Nobody knows what he meant.
Is it possible Boone and the Ole Miss administation had some other reason for not giving Holloway the release he wanted? Is it possible they didn’t believe his claim of a hardship as his reason for wanting to transfer?
But somehow, in a sudden rush to blame, some Clemson fans want to use my story as the reason for Ole Miss’s decision. And my response is, where’s your proof?
Now, I know these people come under the influence of the publishers and writers of the sites to which they subscribe. One writer went so far as to boast about the coverage his site gives to Clemson athletics. I found that piece to be especially laughable because, in my opinion, that’s like Pravda claiming to provide the best coverage of The Kremlin.
I’m certainly an easy target for these Clemson website publishers and writers. I’m not a Clemson insider as they claim they are. I’m an outsider covering Clemson from a distance. And when I break a story on the Tigers, they don’t take it very well. So, my Holloway story gave them a great opportunity to make the implication that it was the reason Ole Miss said no to Clemson. They didn’t identify me by name, but the posters on their sites were only using my story as reference, and the publishers did nothing to disuade that.
Of course, the Holloway story is not complete. He could still end up at Clemson. Or at USC. Or he may land at another school in the state. I will continue to cover this story to the end. Hopefully at some point, Ole Miss will step forward and say why it blocked Holloway from going to Clemson. Until then, Ole Miss, and Ole Miss alone, is to blame for Holloway not going to Clemson. We’ve got all the proof we need to know that.