Q for legal types: if Swafford is found to have taken a kickback in the form of a

[daveinop]

promotion for his son, is that grounds for schools to leave the ACC without penalty?

[Hokie CPA]

promotion for his son, is that grounds for schools to leave the ACC without penalty?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Swofford's son's employment was all above board and everyone was fully aware of where he was and what he did. If everyone knew and there was no objection, then there is no complaint.

Besides, there has been no indication, none whatsoever, from any president or athletic director anywhere in the ACC that any school is interested in leaving, so what's the point in asking this question?

The folks in the Big XII, and all the little scamps who live in their blogosphere, can't seem to grasp the concept... the ACC is a solid conference. Nobody is leaving anytime soon. It's been something like 40 years since any ACC member has left the conference. It's only happened once in almost 60 years.

The Big XII is the conference that needs to worry about losing membership. It was pasted together from the remnants of an ugly breakup 20 years ago and has since lost 4 of its members in the last year and had to invite a couple of Big East refugees, who were rejected by every other decent conference who might consider them, in order to keep enough members to still be considered a conference. The Big XII should be shaking in their boots and praying Texas and/or Oklahoma don't get a BBD offer from the Pac-12. Lose either of those two and the Big XII starts looking an awful lot like the Big Least.

[daveinop]

its a conference realignment board. Forbes article critical of Swafford, infers that ACC w/ Swafford at the helm screwed themselves by precluding more competitive negotiations. If any team wants an out, can they cry foul based on Swafford's potential conflict of interest and avoid paying the penalty? Not an unreasonable question, imo.

[QUOTE=Hokie CPA;337803]

so what's the point in asking this question?

[Hokie CPA]

its a conference realignment board. Forbes article critical of Swafford, infers that ACC w/ Swafford at the helm screwed themselves by precluding more competitive negotiations. If any team wants an out, can they cry foul based on Swafford's potential conflict of interest and avoid paying the penalty? Not an unreasonable question, imo.

From what I gathered in the other thread about the Forbes article, the Forbes writer doesn't know what he's talking about.

[daveinop]

he may not. i flip flop on whether i think teams will bolt the conference. to me, it makes little sense. but there are some fairly connected people that say the negotiations have been ongoing for some time. so today i'm leaning toward believing Clemson and FSU will leave. if they do, they will look to minimize their $ damage. if they can claim Swafford negotiated in bad faith, they may be able to cut some of their losses.

From what I gathered in the other thread about the Forbes article, the Forbes writer doesn't know what he's talking about.

[Reston Hokie]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Swofford's son's employment was all above board and everyone was fully aware of where he was and what he did. If everyone knew and there was no objection, then there is no complaint.

Besides, there has been no indication, none whatsoever, from any president or athletic director anywhere in the ACC that any school is interested in leaving, so what's the point in asking this question?

The folks in the Big XII, and all the little scamps who live in their blogosphere, can't seem to grasp the concept... the ACC is a solid conference. Nobody is leaving anytime soon. It's been something like 40 years since any ACC member has left the conference. It's only happened once in almost 60 years.

The Big XII is the conference that needs to worry about losing membership. It was pasted together from the remnants of an ugly breakup 20 years ago and has since lost 4 of its members in the last year and had to invite a couple of Big East refugees, who were rejected by every other decent conference who might consider them, in order to keep enough members to still be considered a conference. The Big XII should be shaking in their boots and praying Texas and/or Oklahoma don't get a BBD offer from the Pac-12. Lose either of those two and the Big XII starts looking an awful lot like the Big Least.

This! The Forbes guy has no idea what he's talking about.

[VT75]

From what I gathered in the other thread about the Forbes article, the Forbes writer doesn't know what he's talking about.

Forbes, when you try to find out who the writer is there are no details. Seems to be fresh out of college but which one ? This seems to be at the level of Bleacher Report blogging. His doom and gloom opinions of the ACC are over the top, I smell an ACC reject in some way shape or form.

[hokiebob01]

promotion for his son, is that grounds for schools to leave the ACC without penalty?

His son was promoted in 2009. The TV deal in 2010. All of the schools were well aware of where Swoffords son worked throughout.

[Hokie '04]

promotion for his son, is that grounds for schools to leave the ACC without penalty?

Nobody with the ability to speak up will do so because there's some embarrassing (if not illegal) stuff for presidents, ADs, etc.

The Orange Bowl does (or at least did) their annual cruise for ADs and wives. I'm sure there are similar things for the presidents. The annual conference meetings are all held at Florida resorts instead of the ACC HQ in Greensboro or one of the campuses. Who do you think pays for this, ultimately? It's so easy to be generous when you're spending other people's money.

The frustrating bottom line is that these guys are employees of the school, yet are frequently put in positions to choose their own self-interest over that of the school they are supposed to represent. I hope you're sitting down for this....they usually choose what benefits them.

[BayouGobbler]

promotion for his son, is that grounds for schools to leave the ACC without penalty?

Depends on the language of the ACC membership agreement, but probably not. And that is assuming anything happened that wasn't above the table.