Va. Tech accepts ACC invitation...

[BillyMadison]

Hypocrits... I didn't really follow all of this, but sounds like they contradicted themselves...

http://espn.go.com/ncaa/news/2003/0627/1573771.html

[VPI97]

Assholes.

Jeez....I was holding out hope that we would decline at the last minute so as to hold onto a shred of our credibility. I am truly disgusted by my alma mater.

[SirFozzie]

I agree with both of the above.

Hypocritical assholes.

[Daimyo]

bling bling

[tucker342]

hypocritical bastards

[VPI97]

MoFo's

[ShagVT]

This is an email sent out to VT Alumni today from Charles Steger, president of Virginia Tech.

Dear Alumni and Friends:

Since April when we learned that the prospects for the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC) expansion were real, we have been involved in a whirlwind of activity attempting to assess the future of the ACC and Big East athletic conferences. The situation has been in a state of flux, changing if not hourly, certainly on a daily basis. This uncertainty has resulted in a great deal of speculative commentary on television, radio, and in the newspapers. Virginia Tech and I have been the subject of remarks that were both unkind and unburdened by facts.

In order to understand our decisions throughout this process, it is also useful to understand our responsibilities. Our first obligation is to protect the interests of Virginia Tech as well as the overall interests of the Commonwealth of Virginia. There are many other constituencies affected by our actions, including our colleagues in the conferences, alumni, fans, students, and citizens. All of our actions must be carried out in a fashion that honors our contractual as well as ethical obligations to those with whom we are involved.

As in this case, the impacts of our decisions are often
significant. They affect the lives of many people and the economy of our region. Each institution faces the same dilemma whether they are in the Big East or ACC conference.

Virginia Tech is very fortunate in that our athletic programs generate revenue. Only about 40 of the over 100 division I-A athletic programs nationally can make this claim. No taxpayer dollars are used to support our athletic programs. While we field 21 intercollegiate teams, only football produces positive revenue. These funds are used to support the remaining 20 sports and to keep our student athletic fee low. A number of schools in Virginia charge many times our $232 student athletic fee.

It is critical that Virginia Tech be a member of a financially viable
conference. What if athletic conference revenues were reduced by several million per year? Coach Beamer advised me that even the uncertainty ofthe future of the Big East is negatively affecting football recruiting. If we cannot attract good players, our talented coaching staff will be the target of other schools. Finding ourselves several million in the red each year, we could be forced to raise our student athletic fee or begin to eliminate several non-revenue intercollegiate sports to address the problem.

In this year and next, Virginia Tech will have budget cuts of 26% in state support losing $62 million this year and another $11 million next year. We have been forced to raise tuition significantly to protect the quality of our academic programs. Tuition will increase again next year. There is a limit to how much the families of our students can pay and to how much we can increase our financial aid to help with tuition increases. A 300% increase in the athletics fee is simply not feasible, nor would it be appropriate.

Elimination of a number of our Olympic sports not only deprives our students of the opportunity to compete in intercollegiate athletics, but also would result in significant problems with compliance with Title IX programs for our women athletes. In short, our entire intercollegiate sports program would be placed in a negative spiral from which there would be little prospect of recovery.

Given this reality, how did we manage the decision and events over the past two and a half months?

In a rapidly changing situation where decisions must be made in a matter of hours and sometimes minutes, it is only possible to make the decision based on what is known at that moment. Most often there is incomplete information and one certainly does not have the benefit of hindsight, which is of course the preserve of the Monday morning quarterback.

With that being said, let me briefly outline the chronology of events. I have been as surprised as anyone by the expansion process. When we learned that ACC expansion was reality rather than a rumor we had been hearing for several years, we visited with Commissioner John Swofford to learn as much as he was appropriately able to share on the plans for the conference. Virginia Tech has made no pretense for the past 30 years that we would be a good fit for the ACC. We made clear that our first preference was to keep the Big East intact, but if ACC expansion was inevitable, Virginia Tech would be a good fit. As events began to unfold we became increasingly concerned about the future of the Big East conference. Early on, I proposed to other members of the Big East that we sign a mutual non-departure agreement where none of us would leave the conference. That proposal was not accepted by key players in the process. It was apparent to me at that point that schools would leave the Big East Conference. We became a participant in the lawsuit to protect the university and her many interests.

And yes, as reported in the papers on June 8th, I did say on a conference call with 31 participants including 10 reporters that "if we received an offer today, we would not accept it." The context of that discussion is now lost, but at the time we truly thought that would be the appropriate course of action.

As the situation unfolded, University of Virginia President Casteen, Virginia¹s Governor Warner, and Attorney General Kilgore placed their credibility on the line to advocate finding a solution to protect Virginia Tech's future. Needless to say, this was in every major newspaper in the country. When President Clough of Georgia Tech asked to meet with me, we both agreed that it would be advisable to seek legal advice prior to having such a meeting. Further I advised my colleagues in the Big East and our outside legal counsel that such a meeting was to occur. Last Tuesday evening I received a call from Commissioner Swofford inviting us to begin discussions that could lead to an invitation to join the ACC. The next day I advised the Big East that the conversation had occurred and met with our Board of Visitors seeking their advice on the matter. We have been straightforward and above board about our situation. Weighing all of the factors, we concluded that, should an invitation be forthcoming from the ACC, it would be in the best interest of Virginia Tech to accept. Given the circumstances and sequence of events, this is the best choice.

This process has been difficult, but the actions of my colleagues in the Big East with whom I have been involved in this issue have been exemplary. My colleagues in the ACC have also acted with integrity. At the end of the day, many will disagree with our decisions. They of course are free to do so. However, we have dealt with a very complex changing landscape of intercollegiate athletics to the best of our ability in difficult times.

Virginia Tech is now headed to the Atlantic Coast Conference, an
organization of some of the nation¹s most prestigious
universities. Today we have received the formal offer of membership, which we will accept. We know that this affiliation will be good for our students, athletes, fans, and communities for many years to come.


Sincerely,

Charles W. Steger
President

[Easy Mac]

I love how they wait until the 2nd to last sentence to say they are going into the ACC, classic.

[MylesKnight]

Let me translate that Letter and give a quick recap of what was said...


"....Blah, blah, blah, blah, We Sold Out.. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, it's all about the Cheddar.. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, We are thinking of opening a Used Car Dealership at Virginia Tech as well.. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, Integrity? Not here baby.. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, Thank You to the Big East for being such Little Sucker Bi%#hes!!

The End."

[sooner333]

I think it makes sense from the non-finanacial sense, though. Look, your natural rival in the same conference. OU has OSU (and Texas for that matter), Texas has A&M, Cal has Stanford...the list goes on and on of teams whose rival is in their conference. VT and Virginia were not.

Also we must not just look at the revenue, but money saved. Virginia will be within driving distance for many competitions in non-revenue sports. These sports are what typically can take a AD in the black and stick it right in the red. Now they will have more natural rivals and also save money on the sports that hurt them the most.

[MylesKnight]

Check out this very humerous recap of the ACC/Big East/VT proceedings as they occured over these past few weeks..

From the Orlando Sentinel

[Tekneek]

Universities have and always will be about $$$. With that in mind, what actually surprises anyone about this?

[lynchjm24]

Originally posted by MylesKnight
Check out this very humerous recap of the ACC/Big East/VT proceedings as they occured over these past few weeks..

From the Orlando Sentinel

I found the note about K St playing Maine to be humorous.

[GrantDawg]

VT in the ACC is good for the ACC and VT. Florida State is no longer as dominate as Miami is right now, and this gives VT a better shot at the BCS. Bringing VT on board helps shore up the weaker football side of the conference. They still really need to add two more teams so they can make the big money that a conference championship would bring, but getting VT is not a bad second choice to bringing in Miami.

Of course, bringing in both Miami and VT would be better, then maybe add an up and comer in the region (UCF would be my choice) to give them 12. Then again that would make to much sense and it just doesn't look like the ACC has anyone with sense making decisions.

[Tekneek]

There is no guarantee that Miami is going to the ACC, and I half wish they would refuse the invite on principle. For years, the plan was for BC to come in, and they abandoned that in a big showdown over getting VT in or not. It would serve the ACC well to have the whole thing blow up in their face and end up with only one school coming in (and one they only offered an invite to after bowing to political pressure in the state of Virginia). The original plans were about BC, Miami, and Syracuse. They wanted a 12 team league. Due to political wrangling, they, at best, will get 11.

John Casteen (UVA) was going to vote against all expansion without VT at least getting an invite. So they invited VT. Then they had to drop one of the other schools, so they dropped Syracuse. Now, to get their 12 team league they needed to approve VT, Miami, and BC. Well, VT gets approved, and Miami gets approved. However, Anne Fox (NC State) decides to withdraw support for BC and the whole conference ends up with egg on their face trying to explain how their desire for a 12 school league or no expansion turned into an 11 team league with a school that was suing them to prevent the expansion.

[Tekneek]

UNC and Duke voted against all of it, and NC State was the deciding vote on BC. You had to get 7 votes to get in, and while Miami and VT got 7, BC only got 6.

[Wolfpack]

Up to a point, I agree that voting down BC was bad. Of the two northern schools, they were the ones most committed to coming to the ACC and were named as a party in the lawsuit by the Big East schools. I felt bad that this had happened to them because it seemed wrong to do that to them.

After more consideration, I think in the end, it may be good for the league and BC that it didn't happen, at least right now, without further consideration.

The whole VT mess blew up the original plan, which probably had been worked on and calculated for the past several months. Now, the equation was thrown into chaos because at least one of the two northern schools was going to find itself on the outside. With the deadline to seek relese from the Big East coming up, it may have been the easy thing to do to go ahead and approve BC, but I don't think the ACC was totally comfortable with just one northern school, though they did vote 6-3.

I did a bit of research determining straightline distances to the ACC campuses from various potential "twelfth" members. Boston College's average distance to the remaining 11 ACC schools (if you include Miami) was 100 miles more than any of the others (I did Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Penn State, Louisville, and Notre Dame). The nearest ACC member, Maryland, was nearly 400 miles away, and nine of the other ten were over 600 miles. It would have been very hard on BC monetarily and time-wise to have to send all its programs to the rest of the ACC. To put a bit of perspective on it, only Florida State and Miami are over 600 miles from South Bend.

In the end, it might still be the best thing for BC to be in the ACC, but I think it needs more study to see if it benefits them anymore now that they wouldn't be part of a package with Syracuse. (And this sort of logic would also extend a bit to Syracuse, as well, though they are somewhat closer to the ACC than BC is.)