A week from reaching its own timetable to conclude expansion efforts,
the ACC had nothing significant to announce after Saturday morning’s
conference call among its nine CEOs.
No vote was taken and no official invitations were given during a
two-and-a-half hour conversation with UVa president John T. Casteen III
calling in from Ireland, where he is on vacation. ACC Commissioner John
Swofford said the next conference call would be “no later than the middle of
next week.”
There was no official word as to whether the ACC made any further overtures to
a possible 13th member of the expansion proposal, Virginia Tech, after the
Hokies re-emerged as a possible solution to an apparent stalemate last
Wednesday. Swofford said it would be inappropriate to comment on any specific
school but said that everything is still on the table.
Apparently, the ACC went into Saturday’s meeting with several options:
l Vote to expand by the original three schools: Miami, Boston College and
Syracuse (which, Duke, North Carolina and Virginia blocked with their
opposition).
l Vote to expand by four schools, including Virginia Tech, a proposal that
Virginia would approve but might not garner enough support from the other
eight league schools.
l Add only Miami for now, something that North Carolina favors but has had
little other support.
l Table the matter of expansion until a later date.
When asked about everything remaining on the table, if that meant that 12 and
13 schools are still in play, Swofford said: “I wish I could really answer
that, but in fairness to the process and what the presidents want, I don’t
think we’ll really answer that question until the end. There’s more of a focus
on certain aspects than there are on others. But I’d say nothing’s totally off
the table.”
Swofford said that the continued conversations moved closer to the completion
of the process and clarification on a number of questions were the focus of
Saturday’s discussion. He said the session was a positive one and that enough
progress was made to enable the group to reach its goal of ending it by the
end of the month.
That is when the penalty to any exiting Big East school rises from $1 million
to $2 million.
After emerging from his office at ACC headquarters in Greensboro, N.C.,
Swofford’s comments did not reveal whether expansion may be approved by the
next call or crumble.
“It’s hard for us to share anything with you at this point until it gets to an
end result, whatever that end result might be,” Swofford told reporters.
On the issue of an official vote forthcoming on the next call, he said it
could or could not happen.
“All I can tell you there is we hope to be complete by the 30th,” Swofford
said. “Is it possible a vote can take place? Yeah, it was possible today.
“Any time the presidents get together at this point, I think it’s possible
that they could vote. Like today’s call, they didn’t necessarily go into this
call feeling like they had to vote. And I doubt that they’ll go into the next
call feeling that way, but they may vote.”
Swofford did say that there is no single issue holding up the process nor has
a lawsuit filed by five Big East football schools, including Virginia Tech,
against the ACC, Miami and BC, slowed the progress of the league’s expansion
talks.
After those discussions were snagged last Wednesday because of the three
opposing schools, Casteen proposed bringing Virginia Tech back into the
picture as a potential 13th member. One vote shy of approving expansion,
Virginia would be willing to change its position from a no vote to a yes if
Virginia Tech were included in the expansion mix.
Virginia Tech officials said Friday that the school had not received any
formal or informal invitation but that it would seriously consider one if
extended.
“Because some people have their own personal agendas, I’d want a written
proposal with specifics,” said William Latham, vice rector of Virginia Tech’s
Board of Visitors.
While adding the Hokies could influence Virginia to vote affirmative for
expansion, there was some question as to whether the other pro-expansion
schools in the league would agree.
“If there are schools that have heartburn at 12, going to 13 would not help
matters,” said one ACC source. “Thirteen makes it more difficult for some
schools to favor the move. The numbers do not add up with 13 members and no
one can afford to lose money in this endeavor.”
Another sticking point in the inclusion of Virginia Tech is that the Hokies
are litigants in the Big East suit against the ACC. Some indicate that Tech
might have to withdraw from the lawsuit before the ACC could negotiate an
invitation, while some Hokies officials have said that that scenario should
work in reverse.
While conference bylaws require the league to make an on-site visit to a
potential expansion school, a process the ACC has already completed at Miami,
BC and Syracuse, Swofford said that a unanimous vote of the group could alter
that process under the pressure of timetables addressed by financial penalties
for leaving the Big East.
The ACC leader said he was optimistic that all issues will be resolved by the
end of the month.
“We’re down to the last week of our own timetable,” Swofford said. “And that’s
what we’re trying to stay on. I feel like probably we will meet that.
“I think the presidents feel like there’s certainly a desire on their part to
meet that. If it’s not met, it certainly won’t be from lack of effort.”
Bombarded with criticism that the ACC’s desire to expand, leaving the Big East
gutted as a major football conference was morally wrong, Swofford disagreed.
“I don’t think we’ve addressed expansion any differently than numerous
conferences have over the last decade,” he said. “This is part of a strategic
plan that any conference that would look at expansion would undertake. I think
it’s been done very thoroughly and very appropriately.”
On that end, Dean Bonham, the Denver-based consultant who was hired last year
to study expansion for the ACC, defended Swofford’s theory. Bonham said that
he suggested that if the ACC was attempting to expand for financial reasons
only that he recommended several times not to do so because it would not be
that lucrative.
However, Bonham said that the ACC’s intent for expansion was to have a
significant voice in the future landscape of collegiate athletics, which
Bonham predicted will change dramatically in the next decade.
Throughout the process, at least one of the ACC’s coaches has kept a sense of
humor about the subject.
Georgia Tech basketball coach Paul Hewitt was spotted wearing one of the ACC’s
50th anniversary shirts and when approached by reporters, he pointed to the
number 50.
“That’s not about our anniversary,” Hewitt chuckled. “It’s how many teams
we’re going to have.”
ACC presidents yet to vote
on Tech's inclusion
Hokies playing
waiting game
John Swofford says the ACC is moving closer to a final decision on expansion following Saturday's talks.
By MARK BERMAN
THE ROANOKE TIMES
The ACC's interest in Virginia Tech did not get more serious Saturday.
The ACC's nine presidents held a 2 1/2 -hour conference call in the morning, their first since deciding in a conference call Wednesday to put Virginia Tech back on the table as an expansion candidate.
The presidents did not vote Saturday on whether to hold formal talks with Tech. The ACC did not inform Tech it wants to schedule a site visit.
"We'll continue to be in a wait-and-see mood," Tech spokesman Larry Hincker said Saturday. "We're in the exact same position today that we were yesterday. ... If an offer comes, we'll consider it. ... It truly is a continuing limbo state."
Hincker refused to say whether anyone from the ACC talked to Tech on Saturday.
"You can make some assumptions, but I'm not in a position where I can confirm what might be taking place," Hincker said. "You can understand the problematic nature of this situation for my university."
Hincker refused to say if Tech President Charles Steger was on the ACC conference call.
ACC presidents voted last month to hold formal talks with Big East members Miami, Boston College and Syracuse. They have now had four conference calls in two weeks without holding a vote on whether to invite anyone.
Saturday's call "certainly produced movement toward the end result, which we think will be by the end of the month," ACC Commissioner John Swofford told the Greensboro (N.C.) News & Record. "We're down to the last week of our own timetable, and that's what we're trying to stay on. I think we will probably meet that."
Swofford expects another conference call by the middle of this week. If the schools want to change leagues for 2004-05, they must notify the Big East by June 30, or the exit fee they must pay the Big East doubles to $2 million.
Although he didn't name them, Swofford said every expansion option is under discussion. So the ACC could take all four schools; take the original trio and leave Tech out; or take only Miami.
"To one degree or another, everything is pretty much still on the table," Swofford told the News & Record.
A site visit is required by the ACC bylaws before extending an invitation; site visits were made to the other three schools. Swofford said the presidents can probably drop any part of the process if they do so unanimously.
Tech, Connecticut, Rutgers, Pittsburgh and West Virginia sued the ACC, Miami and BC three weeks ago, seeking damages and an injunction to stop the defections. Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal wishes Tech had rebuffed the ACC's interest.
"I was saddened that Virginia Tech would seriously entertain such an overture, but so far as we know it remains a steadfast, committed ally," Blumenthal said. "I cannot speculate on what we will do, if anything, in the event Virginia Tech accepts an offer, but we're keeping open all our options."
Tech would presumably have to drop out of the lawsuit if the ACC's interest in the Hokies heats up.
"There certainly is a risk" if Tech drops out, Attorney General Jerry Kilgore said at a Pulaski picnic Saturday. "We could very easily move from the plaintiff side to the defense side."
Blumenthal said the plaintiffs are determined to continue the battle in the courts but said "perhaps there should be some mediation or face-to-face meeting among wiser, cooler heads."
"There are disputes that sometimes seem completely insoluble and can be mediated because both sides want to avoid a lose-lose situation," Blumenthal said. "There are some lose-lose outcomes here, such as Virginia Tech joining the ACC, which simply depletes the money available without any clear advantage."
Tech would face much criticism if it joins the ACC. Friday's Newark Star-Ledger detailed a pledge Tech athletic director Jim Weaver told Rutgers counterpart Robert Mulcahy in Mulcahy's hotel room when they were in Florida for last month's Big East meetings.
"We are committed to the Big East, and we will continue to be committed to the Big East," Weaver said, pounding his fist into his hand for emphasis, with a reporter present. "Our commitment is unwavering."
Mulcahy told the Star-Ledger the presidents of the five schools in the lawsuit made an oral pact to stay together regardless of what happens with the ACC.
Could the ACC opt to add only Miami? That is the preference of North Carolina Chancellor James Moeser, according to an e-mail obtained by the News & Record.
"Including Miami creates a geographically contiguous footprint that is not umanageable with regard to ... time away from class as well as the costs of travel," Moeser wrote Thursday. "It shores up our southern flank and keeps Florida State solidly in the ACC fold. I have offered to support such a limited expansion to my ACC colleagues, but as yet that idea has not caught on with more than a few."
Big East-ACC mess embarrasses Seton AD
Friday, June 20, 2003
BY TOM LUICCI
Star-Ledger Staff
Whether the Atlantic Coast Conference succeeds in luring three -- or more -- Big
East schools, Seton Hall athletic director Jeff Fogelson says the situation will
eventually leave college athletics as the biggest loser.
With reports surfacing the ACC is considering inviting Virginia Tech in addition
to Miami, Boston College and Syracuse, Fogelson suggested the process had
spiraled out of control.
Adding to the bizarre nature of events was another report this week that said
the ACC, unable so far to garner seven of the nine votes it needs to extend
invitations to the Big East schools, might consider changing the conference
bylaws to require just six votes.
"I'm embarrassed for all of us in the industry, for all of us in higher
education," Fogelson said. "Every day it's something different. Now they want to
go to 13 teams. What's next?"
Just this: Another report has speculated that the ACC is considering Connecticut
as well, looking to create a 14-team league with two seven-team divisions.
The ACC's decision to consider a last-minute invitation of Virginia Tech is
interesting on several fronts.
Some view it as a chance for the University of Virginia to save face. The school
has been under heavy pressure from Virginia Gov. Mark Warner not to be part of a
plan that would undermine the Big East and leave Virginia Tech behind. That
pressure has caused Virginia to waver on its expansion support -- which probably
explains why two conference calls by ACC presidents last week failed to produce
the expected vote.
If Virginia Tech declines the offer, the feeling is Virginia can then vote for
expansion in good conscience, having done what it could to include its in-state
rival.
The possible invitation also puts pressure squarely on Virginia Tech, which has
been a staunch supporter of the Big East.
During league meetings in Ponte Vedra Beach, Fla., last month, Virginia Tech
athletic director Jim Weaver made it clear where his school stood.
"We are committed to the Big East, and we will continue to be committed to the
Big East," Weaver said, pounding his fist into his hand for emphasis during a
visit to the hotel room of Rutgers athletic director Bob Mulcahy, with a
reporter in attendance. "Our commitment is unwavering."
In addition, Mulcahy confirmed that presidents from Pittsburgh, Virginia Tech,
Rutgers, West Virginia and Connecticut made a verbal pact to stay together
regardless of what happens with the ACC.
Virginia Tech is also part of a lawsuit filed against the ACC, Miami and Boston
College, adding another strange twist to the situation.
Fogelson said he views the ACC's last-minute decision to add Virginia Tech into
the mix as "desperation."
"That's the word I keep coming back to," he said.
Depositions in the suit are set for next month, with Miami president Donna
Shalala scheduled for July 1 and Boston College athletic director Gene DeFillipo
on July 8.
Regardless of how the ACC plans play out, the Big East is prepared to reinvent
itself as a two-division conference, with football schools on one side and
basketball schools on the other. Though ESPN.com claimed the basketball schools
had already decided whom they wanted to invite, Fogelson said the report was
wrong.
"We have never had a discussion about schools we're interested in pursuing,"
Fogelson said. "Never, ever. It just hasn't happened."
Fogelson did acknowledge that the Big East will have to change whether or not
the ACC is successful in its expansion plans.
"I think it's important to eventually place ourselves in a position where our
future is not based on reaction," he said. "We need to position ourselves so
that we can control our own fate in the future."
Playing waiting game
2½ hours of talks, but no votes taken by ACC
BY JEFF WHITE
TIMES-DISPATCH STAFF WRITER Jun 22, 2003
If Virginia Tech hoped the Atlantic Coast Conference's nine presidents would
vote yesterday to begin formal discussions with Tech about joining the ACC, it
was disappointed.
The ACC's Council of Presidents met on yet an other teleconference yesterday
morning, with Virginia's John Casteen calling in from Ireland, where he's on
business. The presidents talked for 2½ hours but did not take any votes,
Commissioner John Swofford told reporters at the ACC offices in Greensboro, N.C.
And so Virginia Tech, which competes in the Big East but might jump to the ACC
if extended an invitation, remains on hold.
"Basically nothing has happened, so there's nothing for me to do," John Rocovich,
rector of Tech's Board of Visitors, said last night. "I can't call a meeting to
discuss the fact that nothing has happened."
Rocovich, who lives in Roanoke, is on vacation in South Carolina. He said he
spoke on the phone to Tech President Charles Steger yesterday after the ACC's
teleconference ended.
"We are still in the same position we've been in," Rocovich said. "The only
information we got was that they did lots of talking" and agreed to continue
their discussions on another teleconference.
That's likely to come Tuesday. Swofford said a vote related one of the expansion
models could be taken in the next teleconference.
"Any time the presidents get together at this point, I think it's possible that
they could vote," he said. "Like today's call: They didn't necessarily go into
this call feeling like they had to vote. And I doubt that they'll go into the
next call feeling that way, but they may vote."
Asked about Virginia Tech, Swofford said, "I don't think it would be appropriate
to comment on any of the specific schools. Everything is pretty much, to one
degree or another, still on the table."
Although yesterday's conference call didn't produce any voting, Swofford said,
"I think it was certainly productive in terms of moving us along to an end
result which we think will be there by the end of the month. . . . I think each
session it gets more focused and more funneled on what the end result will be."
The ACC voted May 16 to enter formal discussions with Big East members Miami,
Syracuse and Boston College, and delegations from the conference have visited
each of those schools. Virginia Tech, for which there was little support among
ACC schools early in the expansion process, re-emerged as a candidate Wednesday.
The "end result" to which Swofford referred could take one of four forms:
A nine-school ACC, with the same members, if the push for expansion collapses.
A 10-school ACC, with Miami the new member.
A 12-school ACC, with Miami and two of these three: BC, Syracuse, Virginia Tech.
A 13-school ACC, with the addition of Miami, BC, Syracuse and Tech.
A school that notifies the Big East by June 30 that it will leave the conference
after the 2003-04 school year would have to pay a $1 million exit. If a school
gives notice after June 30, it would have to pay $2 million to the Big East.
In a statement issued after yesterday's conference call, the ACC's Council of
Presidents said it had "moved closer to the completion of the expansion process.
Consideration and clarification of a number of institutional questions were the
focus of the meeting. The meeting was positive and the Council made progress
that will enable it to reach its goal of concluding this process by the end of
the month."
Steger couldn't be reached for comment. Gordon Rainey Jr. of Richmond, rector of
U.Va.'s Board of Visitors, declined to comment. But a U.Va. spokeswoman said
Rainey spoke with several board members yesterday about ACC expansion.
Tech is one of five Big East schools suing the ACC, Miami and Boston College in
an attempt to stop expansion. In a statement yesterday, Mark D. Fabiani, a
spokesman for the plaintiffs, said it "continues to defy belief that the ACC is
relentlessly trying to destroy the athletic programs of fellow academic
institutions even as the ACC's own experts admit there is no financial benefit
in doing so.
"Even more stunning is the ACC's continued pursuit of such predatory,
destructive conduct without any willingness to openly and publicly discuss the
matter with those they are trying to destroy. Day by day, the ACC simply
strengthens the Big East's lawsuit and ensures there will be huge damages to pay
at the end of the process."
ACC's five options not looking good
JOHN MARKON
TIMES-DISPATCH COLUMNIST Jun 22, 2003
Contact John Markon at (804) 649-6892 or jmarkon@timesdispatch.com
Where do they go now?
Nine Atlantic Coast Conference university presidents apparently spent a few
hours on the telephone yesterday and couldn't decide on anything.
Under-the-table feedback from behind the closed doors pictured a contentious
session, hardly the "positive" experience outlined in the Commissioner's press
release.
The only significant words in the one-paragraph release were the last ones:
"concluding the expansion process by the end of the month."
That's only eight days.
At this point, the ACC's expansion plotters seem low on time and options. Here's
what they could be looking at and a guess on their chances of actually doing it:
PLAN A: Add only Miami.
Now that North Carolina's signed off on this idea, the league can move forward
with it at any time. It does improve conference football but doesn't provide for
a championship game. Two other teams and the title game could be added at a
later date. It's a partial face-saver in that league members can always say "We
said we wanted to expand, and we did."
PLAN B: Add the original three expansion targets, Miami, Boston College and
Syracuse.
If the votes were there, they could have done this two weeks ago. From all
indications, the votes still aren't there.
PLAN C: Add the original three, plus Virginia Tech.
This was the midweek favorite because it allegedly changes Virginia's expansion
vote from a "no" to a pivotal "yes." It also appears less likely, particularly
since the presidents couldn't even agree to endorse a mandatory site visit to
Blacksburg.
PLAN D: Add Miami, Virginia Tech and either Boston College or Syracuse.
About the only way ACC leadership could look worse than it does now is to be
seen as stringing along BC and Syracuse for more than a year and then slamming
the door on one at the last minute.
Which doesn't mean they wouldn't do it.
My favorite scenario here would be including Tech as a replacement for Boston
College, just because the schools could immediately change sides as plaintiffs
and defendants in the Big East's lawsuit against the ACC.
The midweek flirtation with Virginia Tech, even if it came without specific
guarantees, could also have revised agendas in Atlanta. The ACC's messenger in
this case was an actual league president - Georgia Tech's. College presidents
are funny guys. They like to be seen as distinguished, trustworthy academicians
and not as principals in an elaborate con.
Even if that's what they are.
PLAN E: Go to 14 teams immediately.
About the only one you can rule out, although there are some ACC officials on
the record as saying a 14-team league may be part of some future strategy. If
this actually is the case, 13 as a temporary measure may be acceptable while the
best possible 14th member is recruited.
My betting favorite would be Plan A - Miami only - not because it really meets
anyone's needs but because it's the only thing anyone can agree on between now
and the end of June.
The delayed decision on which schools to add to get to the magic number of 12
would be just as contentious. In addition, the league would be leaving wannabe
Mouseketeers Syracuse and BC out in the open.
While adding Miami would enhance the ACC's next network television deal, it
doesn't "enhance" too much else. The Hurricanes' undeniable ESPN appeal aside,
ACC fans will find out that "Miami game" is a synonym for a long road trip to
take a big loss in front of a mediocre crowd in a rusty old stadium in a bad
part of town.
A Miami basketball game, of course, means playing in an empty arena in a bad
part of town.
Who wouldn't sign up for that?
A month ago, it all sounded like such a great idea, at least to the people who
plotted it in secret for more than a year. There's an odd thing about back-room
deals, though. Sometimes, they don't look so good when exposed to the light of
day.
Eagles really have no business staying
By Jackie MacMullan, Globe Columnist, 6/21/2003
One of my favorite sports memories of all time was my first trip to the NCAA
Final Four, to Lexington, Ky., in 1985, where three Big East schools -- St.
John's, Villanova, and mighty Georgetown -- were still in the hunt for the
national championship. Villanova pulled off one of the most astonishing upsets
in college basketball history by beating the heavily favored Hoyas, and shooting
9 of 10 from the floor in the second half. The game became an instant classic,
and left all Big East scribes wondering if it could possibly get any better than
this.
It didn't.
Oh, the Big East continued to thrive for a number of years after that, and won
more national championships, most recently Syracuse's title this spring with the
irresistible Carmelo Anthony leading the way. But the magic of Lexington has
never been duplicated. The colorful coaches who gave the league its identity,
fixtures such as Louie Carnesecca, John Thompson, and Rollie Massimino, have
retired or moved on. Patrick Ewing, Georgetown's star center, went to the pros.
The sports landscape changed, and the Big East was forced to change with it.
In 1990, recognizing it had to be proactive, or be devoured by its sports
predators, the Big East voted to invite Miami into the conference. It was a deal
with the devil, and commissioner Mike Tranghese knew it. But the alliance bought
his conference time. Before long, it became apparent football was an inescapable
factor in the conference's survival, so Rutgers, West Virginia, Notre Dame
(although it remains a football independent), and Virginia Tech were added as
the years rolled on.
Now the day of reckoning is here. Miami, Syracuse, and Boston College are
planning to leave the Big East for the Atlantic Coast Conference. The proposed
move has left the Big East in turmoil, prompting a lawsuit by a number of its
remaining schools to block the expansion.
It's getting pretty ugly in these parts. Other Big East schools are charging
that both Miami and Boston College negotiated their exit behind the backs of the
other conference schools. Rev. William P. Leahy S.J., the Boston College
president, and BC athletic director Gene DeFilippo have been branded as both
traitors and football-crazed administrators who have no regard for the grand
history of Big East basketball.
Sorry. Wrong villains. If you want to assess blame, place it at the feet of
Miami. If the Hurricanes don't jump, nobody goes anywhere. But if they do, what
choice does Boston College have?
This isn't about sentiment. It's about business. If Miami and Syracuse go, and
BC stays behind, the school will absorb a near-fatal blow in its quest to remain
a national player in both football and basketball.
I understand the outrage, and the sadness. The Big East was something special.
But those who believe this expansion will be the death of Big East basketball as
we know it haven't been paying attention. Big East basketball has already been
diluted beyond repair.
Remember the days when you couldn't get a ticket when Georgetown came to town to
play BC? There's no such urgency now. The Hoyas are no longer remarkable, and
they only come to town twice every four years anyway. That's no way to promote a
rivalry.
Tradition is wonderful, but Miami doesn't care about it. The Hurricanes joined
the Big East out of convenience, and self-interest. They will leave for the same
reasons. Miami doesn't want to be in the Big East anymore; too bad how it
affects the others.
I ache for Connecticut coach Jim Calhoun, who took a drive down to Storrs,
Conn., from Northeastern University 17 years ago, and completely turned around
the basketball program. After all that hard work, and a national championship of
his own, Calhoun can only watch helplessly while his conference crumbles at his
feet. UConn is part of the lawsuit to halt this expansion, but let's get one
thing clear: If the ACC placed a call to Storrs tomorrow, and invited the
Huskies to join the party, what do you think they'd do? Offer to bring the hors
d'oeuvres.
It's still unclear whether this expansion will, in fact, take place. Earlier
this week the Associated Press reported Virginia Tech had been approached about
joining the ACC, a report the school denied. Maybe it's only Miami, BC, and
Syracuse that go. Maybe it's only Miami -- which will leave the Eagles in
horrific position of returning, tail between their legs, to the schools they
abandoned.
There is also talk this issue might be tabled yet again, and revisited in two or
three years. For those of you thinking that's good news, think again.
Sooner or later, Miami is leaving the Big East. If it happens sooner, and BC
tags along for the ride, it will be an unfortunate, yet inevitable solution for
our local college. If the ACC waits three years, by then the UConn football
upgrade could be complete, and maybe the ACC will decide the Huskies are more
attractive than the Eagles.
If you love sports in their pure sense, you know this expansion is bad for
everyone -- except Miami. It will dilute ACC basketball the way the Big East was
forced to water down its conference. It will destroy the natural rivalries of
two strong basketball conferences, and tack on burdens to student-athletes whose
travel schedule will be a logistical nightmare if they plan on attending any
classes.
But, per usual, money is the driving force. It's all about survival of the
fittest. If the Big East loses its heavyweights, it, too, will do what it needs
to remain viable. It will probably go about it a little differently, with a
little more dignity, and a little more honesty, because that's how Tranghese has
always done things. But, at the end of the day, the Big East will do what was
done to it: steal schools from other conferences to try to fill the gaping
holes.
Successful businessmen tend to look forward, not back. We'll always have
Lexington, Ky., but times have changed. In fact, in case you haven't noticed,
the NCAA doesn't hold a Final Four in a venue as small as Rupp Arena anymore.
It would, after all, be bad for business.
When examining the muddled mess that is ACC expansion, it's best to take a simple approach.
Think of the ACC as a fraternity. This fraternity is known to party harder, throw better parties and produce finer citizens than any of its counterparts.
While the ACC still has a grand tradition, it is in grave danger of being surpassed by the inferior fraternities, who have joined forces to buy more kegs, attract prettier girls to their blasts and entice more upstanding fellows to learn their secret handshakes.
John Swofford, the chapter president, has decided that it's time to extend bids to make the ACC bigger and perhaps to raise enough money for a new paint job on the house.
But the ACC can't take just anybody. A prospective pledge must come from a fine family, be of sterling character and, most important, be a monster on the intramural fields.
Not that everybody in the ACC is perfect. Clemson has proven to be rough around the edges at times. Georgia Tech and Florida State are still kind of the "new guys." All the members have stumbled at one time or another - there was that time South Carolina just up and left - but this is a brotherhood, after all, and what good is that without robust loyalty?
Swofford has scouted out Miami, Syracuse and Boston College and decided that they would make fine additions to the ACC family.
Miami is an easy call. It has the brains, the brawn and the money. Syracuse? Not so much, but the Orangemen are not going to be seen in polite society without the Hurricanes. Boston College seems a little out of place, being Yankee and Catholic at the same time, but Swofford feels like it will find a kindred spirit in Wake Forest despite their obvious differences.
Swofford has some expected resistance to his plan from Duke and North Carolina. Despite hating each other's guts, the Blue Devils and Tar Heels have similar goals. They are the guys who are studying for their LSATs during senior year and can't be bothered to party like during freshman year.
The reason why Swofford can't just push expansion through is Virginia. The Cavaliers' dad, a governor, is a former fraternity member, and he won't continue to donate his wealth unless expansion includes Virginia's cousin, Virginia Tech.
Virginia Tech is worthwhile in a limited sort of way. It can keg-stand for hours. Swofford doesn't feel like the Hokies really fit in with the ACC's image of overall excellence, however, and they lack the refinement to ever get a date to the mixers.
There is also the matter of a few other jealous fraternities who have contacted Dean Wormer and threatened to sanction the ACC charter if it tries to expand. Wormer has decided that it's time for someone to put his foot down, and that foot is him.
Still, Swofford isn't worried about penalties and is thinking about letting in Virginia Tech. Who cares about obstacles? Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? The way Swofford figures it, the ACC needs to expand, and inviting the Hokies opens the door to two desirable scenarios.
First, Virginia offers its approval and the membership grows despite the vociferous objections of Duke and Carolina. The other possibility is that the Blue Devils and Tar Heels will be so appalled at the prospect of sharing a bathroom with Virginia Tech that one or both of them will change their vote in favor of the original expansion plan, getting Virginia off the hook with the governor.
Things are about to get a lot more exciting at the ACC house. Swofford's credo is simple: "Who's with me?"
We'll find out soon.
ACC move to 13 `off table,' source says
BY AL FEATHERSTON : The Herald-Sun
afeatherston@heraldsun.com
Jun 22, 2003 : 12:04 am ET
DURHAM -- The ACC Council of Presidents met for 2½ hours via telephone Saturday,
but still was unable to bring expansion to a vote.
It was the fourth time in 11 days that the league's nine presidents and
conference officials have discussed the issue. Reportedly, the vote to add
Miami, Boston College and Syracuse to the ACC remains hung up one vote short of
approval.
A plan to consider Virginia Tech as a 13th prospective member was reportedly on
the agenda Saturday, but there are indications that at least three league
members were opposed to pursuing the Hokies.
One source suggested that N.C. State -- a consistent expansion proponent -- may
have joined expansion opponents North Carolina and Duke to block formal talks
with Virginia Tech. No official source would confirm that and ACC commissioner
John Swofford refused to answer questions about Virginia Tech's status.
"I don't think it would be appropriate to comment on any of the specific
schools," he said. "Everything is pretty much, to one degree or another, still
on the table."
However, a high-placed ACC source reported after the meeting that "13 is off the
table."
The same source refused to say that Virginia Tech's chances for admission were
dead, only that the ACC is no longer considering adding four new teams, only
three.
John Rocovich the head of the Virginia Tech Board of Visitors, said Saturday
night that he had heard nothing from the ACC.
"I'm sitting here with flat zero," he said. "Should somebody come forward with a
proposition for us to consider, I would certainly give it expeditious
consideration. But I certainly need something to work with because so far
there's been no formal, informal, written or oral proposal. I'm getting down to
where I might settle for a wink and a nod."
There was at least one other indication that the Virginia Tech option was
fading. When the ACC decided to pursue Miami, Boston College and Syracuse, it
required a formal vote of the Council of Presidents to approve formal talks with
the three schools. The results of that vote were released by the ACC.
There was no such announcement after Saturday's meeting and Swofford told
reporters after the teleconference that no votes were taken. Instead, the league
office issued a short, non-committal statement.
"The Atlantic Coast Conference Council of Presidents continued conversations
today and moved closer to the completion of the expansion process," the
statement said. "Consideration and clarification of a number of institutional
questions were the focus of the meeting. The meeting was positive and the
Council made progress that will enable it to reach its goal of concluding this
process by the end of the month."
The end-of-the-month deadline is based on a clause in the Big East by-laws that
requires a $1 million exit fee for any school notifying the league office of its
withdrawal from the conference. After June 30, the exit fee doubles to $2
million per school.
"We're down to the last week of our own timetable," Swofford said. "And that's
what we're trying to stay on. I feel like probably we will ? we'll meet that. I
think the presidents feel like there's certainly a desire on their part to meet
that. If it's not met, it certainly won't be from lack of effort. And nobody
will be happier than me when I can tell you something definitive."
ACC by-laws require a three-fourths vote to approve expansion. Six member
schools have supported the proposal to add three Big East schools, while North
Carolina and Duke have been consistent in their opposition to the plan. The
third opponent is Virginia, led by President John Casteen, who has supported
expansion in the past, but is under intense political pressure in his home state
to oppose any plan that doesn't include Virginia Tech.
It was Casteen who proposed the addition of Virginia Tech as a fourth new
member. It seemed to offer him a way to cast the crucial seventh vote for
expansion or to pressure either Duke or UNC to support the original three-team
expansion plan.
One other option proposed to break the deadlock is to change the ACC's by-laws.
Ironically, that can be done with just six votes, so the expansion advocates can
change the rules to make six votes enough to expand. Reportedly, that plan was
also discussed Saturday, although there appears to be a major hurdle to overcome
-- the by-laws require a 30-day review period before the rules can be changed.
That would push the ACC past its self-imposed deadline, which would either cost
the three new schools an extra $1 million each or force the ACC to delay its
expansion plans for at least a year.
Miami athletics director Paul Dee told the Miami Herald that he's no longer sure
the ACC will vote to expand.
"You're hopeful, but I don't know that it will [happen]," he said. "Things have
been moving along. There have been setbacks, but they keep trying. You would
like to have it resolved as soon as possible."
Swofford sounded more optimistic as he talked to reporters after the meeting.
"I think it was certainly productive in terms of moving us along to an end
result," he said. "I think each session it gets more focused and more funneled
on what the end result will be. It's hard for us to share anything with you at
this point until it gets to an end result, whatever that end result might be."
He was asked if any single issue was holding up the process.
"No ? this thing's been very fluid," Swofford said. "There have been different
things to address at different times. And it's obviously a very important
decision that the presidents take very, very seriously. An awful lot of time and
energy has gone into it and continues to go into it. They want to make sure they
make what they believe is the best decision for the future, which is what this
is all about actually."
Indications are that the ACC presidents tentatively plan to talk again Tuesday.
Swofford wouldn't confirm that report.
"All I can tell you there is we hope to be complete by the 30th," he said. "Is
it possible a vote can take place? Yeah, it was possible today. Any time the
presidents get together at this point I think it's possible that they could
vote. Like today's call: they didn't necessarily go into this call feeling like
they had to vote. And I doubt that they'll go into the next call feeling that
way, but they may vote."
RICHMOND, Va. - Atlantic Coast Conference leaders met again by teleconference on Saturday and said they moved closer to the completion of their expansion process.
"Consideration and clarification of a number of institutional questions were the focus of the meeting," the league said in a statement released Saturday afternoon.
"The meeting was positive and the Council (of Presidents) made progress that will enable it to reach its goal of concluding this process by the end of the month."
The meeting lasted about 2 1/2 hours and "everything was on the table," a high-ranking ACC official told The Associated Press on the condition they not be identified.
The next meeting is expected to come early next week, the source said, adding that "things are getting close. They seem to be pretty determined to get this done."
The ACC last month targeted Miami, Syracuse and Boston College for expansion. The plan seemed likely to sail through the approval process, but that was before Virginia Tech and four other Big East football schools filed suit against the ACC, Miami and Boston College, alleging the three were conspiring to destroy the Big East.
The ACC this week responded by again considering adding Virginia Tech, creating what would be a 13-team league by removing one of the major obstacles to the plan.
Since the lawsuit was filed, Duke and North Carolina have developed opposition to the plan, putting Virginia president John T. Casteen III in position to either cast the vote that would doom the entire idea, or cast a vote that damages Virginia Tech.
Casteen, who has twice suggested Virginia Tech for inclusion in the expansion plan and pledged to continue supporting the Hokies' candidacy, left on a business trip and short vacation in Europe on Wednesday and has been unavailable for comment.
Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, one of the lead attorneys in the lawsuit filed in his state, said the statement by the ACC leadership Saturday indicates that the conference has run into yet another delay and is growing desperate.
"The ACC is really in disarray right now and stymied because it simply can't make the numbers work," Blumenthal said in a telephone interview with the AP.
Blumenthal also said Virginia Tech continues to be a staunch ally in the suit and the league will be ready to respond if that should change.
"If Virginia Tech defects, we will take whatever action is necessary to protect our interests," Blumenthal said. "If we need to play hardball with anyone, we will."
Georgia Tech president G. Wayne Clough presented the idea to Virginia Tech president Charles M. Steger, a longtime friend, on Wednesday night in Blacksburg.
Clough and the ACC have characterized the meeting as informal discussions between old friends, but government sources told the AP that Steger was informed of the chance to get his team into the ACC and began surveying his school's board members.
Steger has not returned repeated phone messages left at his home and office since Wednesday, and Virginia Tech officials have said they have not received an official offer to join the three other Big East teams in jumping to the rival league.
Hokies athletic director Jim Weaver, who admitted to being stunned by the developments initially, later said the school would evaluate an offer when it came.
ACC Presidents Ponder Options
By Josh Barr
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, June 22, 2003; Page E02
ACC university presidents, after their fourth conference call in less than two
weeks to discuss expansion, appear to be at an impasse and now are considering
another possible solution, according to a source with knowledge of the
situation.
Needing to include Virginia Tech in order to secure Virginia's decisive vote for
expansion, ACC university presidents yesterday discussed replacing Boston
College or Syracuse with Virginia Tech in a three-team expansion, the source
said. Virginia is under considerable political pressure and cannot vote for
expansion without protecting Virginia Tech's interests, according to sources
close to both schools.
The other scenarios discussed yesterday were a four-team expansion that includes
Virginia Tech and the one-team addition of Miami that is preferred by North
Carolina Chancellor James Moeser, the source said.
Because the ACC's original intentions were for a three-team expansion that would
create a 12-member league -- the minimum needed to hold a potentially lucrative
conference football championship game -- it is believed that the conference
considers that the optimal solution. There is some concern, sources said, that a
13th member would provide little additional income while dividing revenues one
more way.
The source said that another conference call has not been scheduled.
However, it appears likely the presidents will convene early this week. A
four-team expansion would not occur until the 2005-06 school year, sources have
said, but the other possibilities might occur for the 2004-05 school year; in
that instance, any departing Big East schools would have to double their exit
fee to $2 million if they do not announce their plans by June 30.
"Consideration and clarification of a number of institutional questions were the
focus of the meeting," the ACC said in a statement. "The meeting was positive
and the [presidents] made progress that will enable it to reach its goal of
concluding this process by the end of the month."
While the ACC university presidents consider their options, Virginia Tech is
standing by. Although it is a party to the lawsuit filed by five Big East
schools against the ACC, Miami and Boston College, Virginia Tech is prepared to
enter formal discussions with the ACC.
However, both the ACC and Virginia Tech are hesitant to make the first move,
according to sources. The ACC wants Virginia Tech to remove itself from the
lawsuit before its presidents vote on whether to enter formal discussions.
In the newest twist to the ongoing Atlantic Coast Conference expansion saga, ACC presidents on Saturday discussed the possibility of inviting only the University of Miami and trying to persuade the Hurricanes to accept that scenario by promising two more teams would be added in a year or so, a source with knowledge of the discussions said.
ACC presidents also raised the option of inviting Virginia Tech -- instead of Boston College or, more likely, Syracuse -- as a third team to join UM, sources said.
The conference presidents spoke for 2 ½ hours but were again unable to reach a consensus on whether to invite one, three, four or any schools from the Big East. No vote was taken, ACC spokesman Brian Morrison said.
North Carolina chancellor James Moeser, who along with Duke president Nan Keohane has opposed three-team expansion, has said he would be comfortable adding only UM. Support for that idea has been limited, but ACC commissioner John Swofford has been pushing it.
UM president Donna Shalala has expressed strong reservations about entering the ACC without Syracuse and BC, sources said.
But if 12-team expansion doesn't have enough support, the ACC hopes to persuade Shalala to say yes to 10-team expansion by promising two more teams would be added in several months or a year.
It would be difficult to make that promise. The bylaws say three-quarters of ACC schools must approve expansion, meaning the number of yes votes needed would increase from seven to eight if the ACC adds only Miami.
But only two-thirds of the schools must approve changing the bylaws -- a scenario the ACC has been considering but did not agree to Saturday. That would be a realistic way to lower the number of yes votes needed to expand.
Asked if UM would accept an invitation if it were the only school invited, athletic director Paul Dee said by telephone Saturday: ``We haven't decided, and we haven't been asked.''
The idea of adding four Big East schools did not receive much support during Saturday's call but has not been ruled out, a source said.
Because the schools did not vote to at least begin negotiations with Virginia Tech, there would still be heavy political pressure on Virginia president John Casteen, making him unable to vote yes to adding UM, BC and Syracuse.
With Virginia saying no and Duke and North Carolina remaining steadfast against three-team expansion, the ACC doesn't have the necessary seven votes to add UM, BC and Syracuse.
They might have the votes, though, to add UM, BC and Virginia Tech. But that would not please Shalala, who is friends with Syracuse chancellor Buzz Shaw.
''Everything is pretty much, to one degree or another, still on the table,'' Swofford told North Carolina-based reporters outside of his Greensboro office.
Swofford declined to give details of Saturday's call but reiterated he expects a decision by the end of the month, when the exit fee to leave the Big East before the 2004-05 academic year jumps from $1 million to $2 million.
Another conference call is expected early this week, possibly Tuesday.
In the past 11 days, the presidents have spoken for 10 ½ hours over four separate calls without reaching a resolution.
''We are down to the last week of our own timetable, and that's what we're trying to stay on,'' Swofford said. ''I feel like we will probably'' meet that.
Dee, who has been given frequent updates by Swofford, expressed uncertainty whether expansion will occur. ''You're hopeful, but I don't know that it will,'' Dee said. ``I hope [it happens]. . . . There have been setbacks, but they keep trying. You would like to have it resolved as soon as possible.''
Shalala is reluctant to enter the ACC alone for several reasons, sources say. Among them: loyalty to BC and Syracuse; the fact an ACC without those teams would leave the conference without a presence in the Northeast, where UM has a large alumni base; and the fact a 10-team league couldn't hold a lucrative conference championship game.
Leagues are required to have 12 teams to hold a football title game. The ACC could petition for a rule change. But Jean Ponsetto, chairwoman of the NCAA's champions/competition cabinet, said in a telephone interview that such a rule change would be unlikely to pass.
ACC officials hope the promise of additional expansion could make Shalala accept a 10-team offer, if that's the only scenario that gets seven votes. Two UM officials said long-term stability in the ACC would be difficult to turn down, even if Miami enters alone.
If the ACC expands to 13 teams, which is unlikely, UM probably would accept the offer, but Dee conceded 13 ``is not the best number.''
John Rocovich, rector of Virginia Tech's influential Board of Visitors, spoke with university president Charles Steger and said Steger ``has no hints about what is coming next.''
At least for now, UM would stay in the Big East if ACC expansion does not happen. But the SEC could become an option for ACC members FSU, Clemson and Georgia Tech.
Fourth down, long to go for ACC
E-mail Tony Barnhart
On Saturday, the ACC's nine presidents held their fourth meeting in the past 12
days and again took no vote on expansion. The three previous meetings with no
votes could be explained away. This time, however, it may signal that the ACC's
expansion movement is in trouble.
Saturday's meeting was supposed to be about the possibility of adding Virginia
Tech as a 13th member. Boston College, Miami and Syracuse already have been
wined and dined and are just waiting for the official invitation.
The ACC needs seven votes to extend invitations. Duke and North Carolina don't
want to expand to 12 teams, period. Virginia can't vote yes unless Virginia Tech
is included.
So last Thursday the ACC presidents said to Virginia Tech: Would you be
interested if we asked? Their response: Ask first, and put it in writing.
The ACC presidents were expected to decide Saturday if they wanted take that
formal step toward Virginia Tech. Officials at the Big East school which, by the
way, is party to a lawsuit against the ACC, certainly were expecting some kind
of word. If not, what was Thursday's flirtation all about?
But, according to people familiar with Saturday's meeting, at some point it
became clear that if Virginia Tech were voted on as the 13th member of the ACC,
the seven necessary votes would not be there. Translation: At least one of the
six schools currently in favor of expansion decided that 13 would not be lucky .
So now the ACC is at an impasse. Duke and North Carolina won't budge. Virginia
has to support Virginia Tech, but the votes aren't there for a 13-team league.
What happens next? It could get very ugly.
One option would be to invite Miami, Virginia Tech and then choose between
Syracuse and Boston College. In that scenario, we hear Syracuse would be out.
North Carolina Chancellor James Moeser continues to push the compromise idea of
only adding Miami. Before now, the idea has gotten little support among ACC
presidents because NCAA rules say a conference must have 12 teams to hold a
championship football game. UNC officials believe that rule could be changed.
Adding only Miami also would salvage the Big East and therefore the lawsuit
might go away.
The final, last-ditch effort would be to change the ACC's bylaws so that only
six votes were needed to expand. But what took place Saturday, according to
those familiar with the process, is an indicator that the six votes necessary
would not be there either.
But keep this in mind. If expansion completely falls apart in the next 10 days
and the ACC has to continue with nine teams into its next TV contract (2006),
that will not be the end of the story. Life will not go on as normal.
Commissioner John Swofford probably would not stick around after such a major
disappointment.
If this expansion effort blows up, causing the ACC national embarrassment, the
reality is that two schools (Duke, UNC) made it happen.
Schools like Florida State, Georgia Tech and Clemson, who recruit against a
12-team SEC and have poured millions into their programs, will wonder if their
interests are best served in a nine-team ACC.
The SEC is not currently in expansion mode, commissioner Mike Slive told me
Friday. But what if some combination of FSU, Clemson, Georgia Tech and Miami
picked up the phone and said they wanted to come?
For years these schools have believed college football is headed in this
direction. Those schools believe the era of 12-team super conferences in
football is a train that already has left the station. If something doesn't
change in 10 days and expansion dies, they may have to leave the ACC in order to
get on board.
UNC leader pushes Miami
Moeser sees 1-team gain as way to end stalemate
By BARRY SVRLUGA, Staff Writer
Another meeting of the ACC's Council of Presidents came and went Saturday
morning with no vote on expansion, but North Carolina Chancellor James Moeser is
pushing harder in favor of adding only Miami.
The ACC's nine presidents and chancellors spoke for more than two hours by phone
Saturday, considering several options: adding Miami, Boston College and
Syracuse, as originally planned; pursuing Virginia Tech, too; or adding just
Miami.
Moeser and Duke President Nan Keohane first opposed expansion, then voted in
favor of ACC discussions with Miami, BC and Syracuse, but later expressed
concerns again. Now, Moeser sees the addition of Miami and its powerful football
program as a potential compromise to help break the stalemate that has stalled
expansion.
"I think this could be a very good solution that moves us forward, and I've made
this case to my colleagues," Moeser said in a telephone interview Saturday.
"Miami is the addition that arguably lies in the geographic footprint of the
ACC.
"It certainly brings great football strength to the conference without all the
baggage of having 12 teams -- divisions, the lack of round-robin schedules, the
concerns we have for student-athletes regarding travel time and the cost of
travel."
Moeser declined to discuss the details of the Council of Presidents' conference
call Saturday. The next conference call probably will take place Tuesday or
Wednesday. The presidents and chancellors reiterated their desire to complete
the process by June 30.
A league statement Saturday said only that they had "moved closer to the
completion of the expansion process."
"There wasn't anything definitive done or decided," Wake Forest President Thomas
Hearn said in a phone interview. "There were a lot of questions asked and
answered. ... The issue was to clarify all of the options."
Moeser said he still opposes a 12-team conference. Seven of the league's nine
CEOs must vote yes in order for any expansion plan to be approved.
Last week, at the urging of Virginia President John Casteen III, the ACC made an
overture to Virginia Tech. Casteen has been pressured by Virginia Gov. Mark
Warner and others to vote against any expansion plan that doesn't include
Virginia Tech.
Hearn said Virginia Tech, which hasn't closed the door on joining the ACC, "was
talked about in general terms" Saturday but that nothing was settled.
Tech still is involved in the Big East football schools' lawsuit against the
ACC, BC and Miami. Virginia Tech President Charles Steger declined comment
Saturday, but Tech spokesman Larry Hincker said, "It's an extremely difficult
position to be in."
As for whether the possibility of a 13th member would prompt Duke or UNC to
change its position on 12, Moeser said he wasn't budging.
"I'm on the record: I'm opposed to 12," Moeser said. "And if 12 is bad, 13 is
worse. It's sheer madness. That would be absolutely the worst thing."
Keohane could not be reached for comment Saturday.
Although Miami alone could put the ACC in a better position to negotiate a
favorable television contract for football, some of the benefits that expansion
proponents have cited would be lost if the league added only one school.
For example, under NCAA rules, the ACC could not hold a championship game in
football without the required 12 members. The ACC projects that a title game
could bring in about $7 million a year.
Miami would have to be convinced that joining the ACC by itself would be better
than remaining in the Big East. During the Big East meetings last month, Miami
athletics director Paul Dee advocated a 12-team league.
Neither Dee nor Miami President Donna Shalala was available to comment Saturday.
Moeser said he didn't think it would be "appropriate for me to characterize"
where Miami stood on joining the ACC by itself, and he didn't indicate whether
the plan for 10 schools would be accepted by the league's other presidents and
chancellors.
Still, Moeser said he has come around on expansion, albeit to 10 schools instead
of 12.
"I started thinking through what the arguments were, that if we stayed pat,
Miami may be lured into the SEC and Florida State could follow," Moeser said.
"This shores up our southern flank. ...
"I'm very weary of these discussions. That's one thing we're unanimous on, so
I'm pressing this. My argument is that we can develop consensus on it, and I
believe complete consensus."
Swofford is ACC's man with a plan
By NED BARNETT, Staff Writer
John Swofford started his football career at North Carolina as a quarterback and
ended it as a defensive back. In recent weeks, his attempt to guide the Atlantic
Coast Conference toward expansion has gone the same way.
The league commissioner started out last month leading the ACC on a drive to
grow from nine to 12 schools. Now, faced with a lawsuit, pressure from Virginia
politicians and some internal opposition, he's trying to defend that goal.
For Swofford, 54, a quiet leader known for doing his homework and building
consensus, the resistance has come as a surprise.
After studying expansion for almost two years, Swofford brought forth a proposal
to invite Miami, Syracuse and Boston College into the ACC. None of his planning
anticipated the strong reaction from the conference that would lose the three
schools, the Big East.
Big East commissioner Michael Tranghese attacked the ACC, saying, "They're a
bunch of hypocrites. They operate in the dark." Five football-playing Big East
schools sued the ACC, Miami and Boston College, claiming they had conspired to
destroy the Big East.
Virginia politicians pushed UVa to vote against expansion if it didn't include
Virginia Tech, prompting the ACC to weigh sending an invitation to Blacksburg,
Va.
Some faculty members have said expansion puts athletics money ahead of academic
quality.
On Friday evening, a weary Swofford said his exhaustion with the process is
beginning to match his bewilderment with the opposition.
"College athletics haven't seen this kind of reaction before," Swofford said.
"There's a fundamental belief we have that schools have freedom to associate
with whom they want."
Other leagues, including the Big East, have expanded without major protest.
Swofford is puzzled that the ACC's attempt is being condemned as a grab for
money and likened to a corporate raid.
"I don't think the ACC has approached expansion any differently than other
conferences that have expanded," he said.
What's different is that the ACC's effort could devastate football in the Big
East and threaten its automatic bid to a Bowl Championship Series game.
Expansion also would be a fundamental change for the ACC, a 50-year-old,
tradition-bound conference largely identified with basketball.
As expansion has met resistance, criticism of Swofford has increased. Some
faculty members at ACC schools see him as willing to sell the ACC's culture and
weaken its academic standards in return for more TV money.
At North Carolina, where Swofford served 17 years as athletics director before
moving to the commissioner's job in 1997, the faculty has rallied against
expansion and appears to be keeping Carolina's vote in the "no" column. North
Carolina, Duke and Virginia are keeping the ACC short of the seven votes needed
to expand.
Sue Estroff, chairwoman of UNC-Chapel Hill's Faculty Council, sees Swofford as a
"professional manager" making deals that ignore what is best for students.
"His interests should be the students', but I haven't seen any indication that
he's doing that," she said.
Maintaining position
Swofford said expansion is aimed at preserving the ACC's income and its
influence.
"It's not just financial, as it has been painted," he said. "It's not a major
windfall. It may be as much about maintaining the financial aspects as improving
them."
While the ACC has often weighed expansion, the current plan arose in July 2001
from a request by George Nemhauser, the faculty athletic representative at
Georgia Tech who had been named president of the ACC for 2001-02. The ACC
presidents and chancellors endorsed the review in September 2001.
Swofford said the more he looked at trends and numbers, the more he came to see
expansion as the only way to maintain the ACC's revenue and its position as one
of the nation's top conferences.
"The ultimate analysis that came from [the ACC study] suggested that we were
better positioned as 12 [schools] or some form of expanded beyond nine in terms
of where major college athletics seems to be going," he said.
Swofford said he is alternately leading and following on expansion.
"As commissioner, you're expected to lead, and you're expected to be responsive
to the institutions. It's a leadership role and a service role," he said. "In
this instance, the majority of our league on four occasions voted that our
longer-term interests would be served by expanding. I agree with that
assessment."
As he guides the discussions among ACC athletics directors and presidents,
Swofford has taken a low public profile. But that hasn't kept some from
attacking the ACC's leadership.
Richard Blumenthal, the Connecticut attorney general who is leading the lawsuit
brought by five Big East schools against the ACC, Miami and Boston College,
described the ACC as "blinded by its obsession to win at all costs."
A different image
Those who know Swofford say the polite and low-key commissioner hardly fits the
image of a raider.
"I don't think John has a predatory bone in his body," said Todd Turner, a
former N.C. State athletics director, now in the same post at Vanderbilt, who
was Swofford's classmate at Carolina. "I think John is trying to look after the
interests of his schools."
Tom Mickle, a former associate ACC commissioner under Swofford and now executive
director of Citrus Sports, a bowl game organizer, said of Swofford, "He's
quietly effective. He's a terrific consensus-builder. He does a tremendous job
behind the scenes."
But beneath Swofford's quiet manner is a drive to excel, Mickle said.
"He's definitely a competitive person," Mickle said. "Don't confuse quietness
with not being a trench fighter."
Swofford's career reflects that drive. Since he took his first job as athletic
ticket manager at Virginia, he has pushed for more exposure and revenue from the
big-money sports, men's basketball and football.
As Carolina's AD, he oversaw the construction of the Dean Smith Center and the
Kenan Football Center. Both projects put Carolina well ahead in facilities but
also brought ongoing expenses.
The Smith Center ran an annual deficit of $2.2 million last year. The cost was
split evenly between the state of North Carolina and UNC's athletics department.
Keith Brodie, who was president of Duke from 1985 to 1993, said Swofford, as
UNC's athletics director, was a force behind the ACC's last expansion, the
admission of Florida State in 1991.
Brodie opposed the expansion and thought there were enough votes to block it,
but he said Swofford persuaded UNC officials to vote in favor. "It was clear
John saw this as having great promise for the conference," he said.
Making his mark
Since becoming commissioner in 1997, Swofford has made his mark as a TV
negotiator with a golden touch. In December 1999, he reached a 10-year, $300
million TV agreement with Raycom/Jefferson Pilot that doubled the ACC's
basketball TV revenue. He also improved TV football contracts with ESPN, ABC and
Jefferson Pilot that run through 2005.
Swofford's TV savvy led to his selection as coordinator of the Bowl Championship
Series for the 2000 and '01 football seasons.
When the NCAA presidency opened last year, Swofford was mentioned as a possible
candidate. But with college presidents pushing for more emphasis on academics
and controls on athletic spending, the time was not right for a commissioner.
Instead, the job went to Myles Brand, former president of Indiana University.
Ken Haines, CEO of Raycom Sports, negotiated with Swofford on the record-setting
ACC basketball contract. Haines, who describes himself as a close friend of
Swofford, said, "I've been doing this for 23 years, and I've dealt with a lot of
commissioners around the country and [Swofford] is one of the best I've ever
dealt with."
What makes Swofford effective, Haines said, is his ability to listen and give
ground.
"In negotiating with John, you have the feeling that he understands and has
empathy for your position," Haines said. "He's unlike others who take a hard
stand and leave no room but to agree or disagree. With John, most of the time,
it comes to a resolution that both sides feel good about."
Swofford, a native of North Wilkesboro and a three-sport MVP at Wilkes Central
High School, attended Carolina on a prestigious Morehead Scholarship.
After a modest football career, he graduated in 1971 and went on to receive a
master's degree in sports administration at Ohio University. He worked several
years at Virginia under AD Gene Corrigan, who became the ACC commissioner before
Swofford. In 1980, Swofford was named athletics director at Carolina when he was
31, making him the youngest AD at a major college.
Swofford, whose first marriage ended in divorce in 1998, lives with his second
wife, Nora, near the ACC's Greensboro headquarters. He has two grown children
from his first marriage and a stepdaughter. As commissioner, he oversees a staff
of about 27 employees and was paid about $433,000 last year.
Former employees and associates describe him as polite, forthright and loyal.
At Carolina, Swofford hired Mack Brown as football coach and Sylvia Hatchell as
women's basketball coach and stood by them as their teams struggled early.
Hatchell has never forgotten Swofford's support when her confidence was shaken.
He encountered her one day as she was leaving work. He put his arm around her
and said, "You're my coach."
"There are not many people I admire and respect more than John Swofford," she
said. "One of the greatest things about John is he has a knack or a talent for
bringing out the best in people."
If expansion fails, Swofford said he would make an extra effort to bring out the
best in the ACC.
"[Expansion] is the right thing," he said, "but if it doesn't work we're still
strong and still viable. It may just take a little more work to maintain our
place."
ACC's plans to expand look doomed
By Craig Barnes | Hurricanes Correspondent
Posted June 22, 2003
The nine Atlantic Coast Conference presidents voted on nothing Saturday and got
further from a consensus of what to vote on. ACC expansion isn't dead, but it
could be in trouble.
"Consideration and clarification of a number of institutional questions were the
focus of the meeting," the conference said in a release. "The meeting was
positive, and the Council [of Presidents] made progress that will enable it to
reach its goal . . . by the end of the month."
There was discussion of adding Virginia Tech, but no votes were taken, according
to one source. The presidents didn't vote to expand to 13 teams, and they didn't
vote to open formal discussions with Virginia Tech. The option of 13 teams
received little support.
"Limbo is the best way to characterize this situation," a Virginia Tech source
said.
A North Carolina-backed option to add only Miami doesn't have sufficient support
and might not be viable for the Hurricanes, who are interested in joining a
12-team league with a championship game to provide increased revenue.
After Saturday's meeting, the two options with the best chance are remaining
status quo with nine schools or voting for 12 and including Virginia Tech as a
substitute for Syracuse to join with Miami and Boston College. Virginia Tech's
inclusion is necessary to free Virginia President John Casteen from political
pressure so he can vote for expansion.
"Financially, Syracuse wins hands down," one ACC president said. "Politically,
Virginia Tech might be the only way to go."
If Virginia Tech is substituted for Syracuse, the annual shares for each school,
currently at $9.7 million, will be reduced, and there could also be a problem
with Miami.
Duke and North Carolina remain against expansion. North Carolina State isn't the
advocate of expansion that it has appeared to be. When Virginia Tech is included
and the money drops, Maryland's position becomes fluid.
The presidents also couldn't reach a two-thirds majority Saturday to change the
ACC's constitution and bylaws to allow expansion to be passed with six votes
rather than seven.
The next call probably will come Tuesday or Wednesday. The presidents are trying
reach a decision by June 30, allowing the Big East schools to meet a $1 million
exit fee deadline for 2004-05.
After July 1, the Big East can change its bylaws to make withdrawal from the
conference a more egregious act with a higher financial penalty.
"We're down to the last week of our timetable, and we're trying to stay on it,"
Commissioner John Swofford said. "Everything remains on the table. Nobody will
be happier than me when I have something definitive to announce."
The failure of the nine presidents to reach a consensus could send the
proponents of the issue -- FSU, Clemson and Georgia Tech -- looking for a new
home with the Southeastern Conference a solid possibility, and Miami might not
be far behind. Some of the schools have already discussed whether to gauge the
interest of the SEC.
"There is nothing happening right now, but it's something that you can't rule
out," said one ACC athletic director whose school is a proponent of expansion.
The SEC already has 12 members. Commissioner Mike Slive indicated the SEC had
received no calls about expansion and wasn't actively pursuing it. Miami also
could return to the Big East.
If FSU, Georgia Tech or Clemson left the ACC, each remaining ACC school's annual
revenue shares would be significantly reduced.
That would leave the conference with six members and no power base to maneuver
itself in the fast-changing landscape of football and college athletics.
GREENSBORO - The Fraternal-Maternal Order of Loyal Collegial Conferees conducted a fourth teleconference yesterday, and once again the lodge arrived at the same conclusion:
The ACC will expand in due course, or it won't.
Commissioner John Swofford speculated that the absence of news must frustrate news gatherers, a choice of words that reflects growing frustration among the newsmakers in university towers. The frustration suggests a continuing impasse on each specific expansion issue.
Under rules set out in the conference bylaws, it takes at least seven votes from the nine presidents and chancellors to admit a new member. Swofford could possibly get seven votes for Miami alone, but ACC profiteers want at least 12 teams and a lucrative football-championship game. Miami wants sporting company from its prime student-body incubators in New York and Massachusetts. That requirement produced the three-way deal with Syracuse and Boston College, a three-way deal evidently bound for approval until Duke and North Carolina shifted positions for the second time and joined Virginia in the opponents' camp.
By a projected 6-3 vote, the expansion world stopped turning.
President John Casteen III of Virginia, a clever fellow, found himself boxed in by Virginia's governor, Virginia's attorney general and Virginia Tech's 40-year hunger for ACC acceptance. Casteen - described as a genuine Tech advocate, in contrast with gobs of Virginia fans and athletics personnel - devised a shrewd gambit that served as his escape hatch and, presumably, as Tech's public litmus test. The proposal: Make Virginia Tech the 13th member.
The brilliant stroke put the ball in Virginia Tech's court. If Tech turns down the chance, either formally or informally, then Casteen can vote for expansion with a clear public conscience and break the logjam. If Tech dumps on its dwindling Big East partners and seizes the chance, Casteen one day might drive around the Old Dominion billed as Major Domino, the football kingmaker.
With President G. Wayne Clough of Georgia Tech as envoy, the ACC pitched the idea to Virginia Tech's president Wednesday night. Before the next sundown, various Virginia Tech officials conveyed their willingness to consider a serious ACC offer. A few wondered aloud whether Casteen's compromise was actually a nefarious plot to provoke another flop from Duke or Carolina (which, under the conspiracy theory, would swallow hard and vote for the original three-team expansion to block Tech or to avoid cutting an extra slice of revenue pie).
Skeptics wondered whether Casteen was the plan's lone inventor or merely the front man. In response to a question yesterday, Swofford endorsed the single-inventor theory.
'I think all along Virginia has been supportive of Virginia Tech's candidacy,' Swofford said. 'You're giving him proper credit.'
Virginia Tech leaders hedged bets on the precondition that the university must withdraw as a plaintiff from the five-school lawsuit against the ACC, Miami and Boston College.
The Connecticut attorney general, the loudest boaster for the bereaved Big East parties, issued a blistering, two-pronged statement on Friday. 'As of today, Virginia Tech is still a member of the Big East and an active plaintiff in our lawsuit,' Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said. 'So far as we know, it remains committed to our legal cause and has no intention to defect from the Big East. We will not speculate on what actions, if any, we will take if Virginia Tech defects.'
ACC leaders insist that the suit lacks credence because schools are free to choose conferences and because the Big East contract spells out the steps for withdrawal.
The suit arrived about the same time that Carolina and Duke, responding to faculty dissent, renewed their opposition. The expansion steamroller, which included visits to the three new campuses, lost its steam when the 6-3 split solidified. Big East folks cited the suit as a chilling influence that slowed the process.
'I really don't think it has,' Swofford said. 'I can understand how it might look that way. In reality, based on the discussions and our presidents and so forth, I think we would probably be right where we are time-wise, regardless.'
Not necessarily. Where the expansion proponents are right now is a place graphically described as Up Against It. They have a week to conclude the deal, file exit visas and meet the June 30 deadline for the lower-priced ejection seat ($1 million to begin ACC play in 2004-05).
The Fraternal-Maternal Order of Loyal Collegial Conferees let another Saturday slip by without a defining vote. Casteen phoned in from Ireland, a few minutes late because of some unexplained technical glitch. Other academic CEOs dialed headquarters from assorted beaches and paneled offices.
At the end of the 21/2-hour teleconference, no votes were taken. According to an ACC official, some parties want more financial projections from the league consultant about the impact of a 13th team.
Chancellor James Moeser of North Carolina keeps pushing his counteroffer of inviting Miami and no one else, which would leave Syracuse and BC wiping mud off their reputations and could even drive Miami away, toward the Southeastern Conference.
At the first ACC rush party, Virginia nominated Virginia Tech, which failed to attract seven votes. Opposition remains, and it's conceivable that Tech will never get the formal invitation.
Without a flop, the three-team plan might never have enough support to justify a vote. Are the 12-team and 13-team models still in play?
'I wish I could really answer that, but in fairness to the process and what our presidents want, I don't think we'll really answer that question until the end,' Swofford said. 'There's more of a focus on certain aspects than there are on others, but I'd say nothing's totally off the table.'
What's on the table? The Fraternal-Maternal Order of Loyal Collegial Conferees keeps expanding the menu: Hurricane cocktails, citrus salad, flying bird and cold turkey. That leaves the lodge a lot to chew on and not enough water to drink, which might explain the irritation, the frustration and the recurring digestive-tract nightmare.
If everything sticks on 6-3, the ACC can't expand without changing the rules in the middle of the game and letting 6-3 constitute a legitimate super majority. Although viable, that option would invite more ridicule and condemnation.
Commissioner Swofford stood outside headquarters at lunchtime yesterday with the sun beating down on his forehead and distant critics beating up on his image, which will suffer further assault if expansion fails. He was no more than a half-wedge from a Grandover Resort fairway, and someone inquired about his tee time.
'I'm not playing golf these days,' Swofford said. 'What's golf?'
It's a game college sports leaders used to play all summer long, before they became masters of the teleconference and would-be masters of college corporations.