As regular readers of this space will remember, I am the unfortunate member of the TRC triumvirate that lives and works in the heart of CTU country:  Pickens County.  And while my location near Tigertown does afford many benefits (friends, lakes, mountains, and the wondrous Mrs. Tbone) it occasionally induces face-palming frustration.

Today was frustrating.

My ride into work is usually a quiet time, interrupted only by the occasionally interesting story on SCETV Radio’s Morning Edition.   But since SCETV began its fall pledge drive this week, I’ve turned my radio dial to other programming (yes, I’m a freeloader on public radio, but that’s a rant for another blog).  After hovering over a few stations, I settled on WCCP, the flagship radio for Clemson athletics.

To my surprise, the normally banal and commercial heavy Mickey Plyler Show was actually engaged in an interesting debate.  The host and several of the callers were arguing over the recent revelation that local Greenville hero, George Hincappie, participated with his pal Lance Armstrong in illegal doping during their professional cycling careers.

The points of view of the callers ranged from outrage to excuse-making, but the host of the program was resolute:  a failure to abide by the rules of a sport cannot be tolerated.  Any deviation from the accepted standards of conduct, Mr. Plyler loudly asserted, disqualifies the participant from any claims of glory.  We can forgive, the host argued, but we should NEVER forget.

He drew the contrast even sharper when one caller attempted to argue that we, as consumers, are entitled to the best performance possible from our athletes, and since they control their own bodies, we should legitimize widespread doping and just enjoy the resulting show.

Plyler was livid: How can we accept these improper practices?  He offered the caller a choice:  How would the caller (an SC fan apparently) feel if Clemson paid the top athletes in the country to come to the Upstate and play ball?  How would an SC fan react if Clemson clobbered them on the gridiron with players that were bought and paid for by the Tiger faithful?

The caller retreated, and admitted that he would not like such an ill-gotten result.  Plyler crowed victorious, and proceeded to moralize on our collective solemn duty to police ethical integrity in sport.

I screamed at the radio.

Literally screamed.

I didn’t scream because of similarities between this debate and the steriod scandals at Clemson and South Carolina in the mid 1980s, although that would be an interesting discussion.  Instead, my incredulity was based on the fact that we already know the answer to Plyler’s rhetorical question because IT ACTUALLY HAPPENED, from roughly 1978 until at least 1984.

 As we all know, Clemson paid for its players and then won it all.

Now, just how does one of the chief orange apologists dare to assert such moral superiority on the doping issue when the chief accomplishment of his cherished institution, the 1981 National Championship in football, was the direct result of illegally recruited athletes?  Were the Clemson athletes not paid?  Were they not induced to sign with cash, cars, and gifts to mom?  Were the violations not so widespread that the NCAA handed down its harshest penalties up to that date?

Either Mickey Plyler has a very selective memory, or he is applying different ethical rules to each situation depending on whether or not he is a fan of the offender.

Or maybe he is going to advocate that the National Championship banner come down from Clemson’s Memorial Stadium.

Maybe, but I’m not going to hold my breath.  I’ll just have to keep screaming at the radio.

How about “The Shoulder Bowl?”

Yeah, I don’t get it either.

The ACC announced yesterday that the prettiest girl still alone on the dance floor, Notre Dame, is joining the conference.  Sounds good, surprisingly good, right?

Oh, wait, there’s one little detail we forgot to mention.  Quoting from the official release:

 . . . with the exception of football”

Pesky little detail there, eh?

Basically, Notre Dame is shifting from the woeful Big East (which will now completely collapse, I’ll wager) to the nervous and twitchy land of the Atlantic Coast Conference.  Same deal basically, except that Notre Dame agrees to play 5 ACC teams in football each year.  This isn’t really an innovation or change for the Golden Domers, as they already have four now-or-future ACC teams on their current schedule.

While the initial reaction to this move was widely positive for the ACC, more national pundits are beginning to question the wisdom of ACC commissioner John Swofford.  In the end, it appears that Notre Dame gets everything it wanted, and the ACC gets the same bad deal that didn’t work for the Colonial Athletic Association or the Big East.

Positives for Notre Dame include:

– Immediate upgrade to basketball revenue and profile.  The Big East is no basketball slouch, obviously, but the ACC is the brand name.

– Upgrade bowl tie-ins for football.  That’s right, the deal allows Notre Dame to leapfrog the bowl-eligible ACC schools for any bowl slot save a BCS game, which the Domers are already eligible for as the golden independent.  Swofford has guaranteed that at least one ACC school a year is gonna head to a less than prime bowl because the prime bowl can pick the Irish.

– No real commitment to do anything with the ACC in football other than play a few of them each year.  Which ND already does.

– Stable (relative to Big East) conference while still avoiding the B1G and Big 12 rules requiring full membership.  Interestingly, the ACC had the exact same rule . . . until yesterday.

– Notre Dame’s academics are more consistent with the ACC than with the Big East.

So, what are the positives for the ACC?

– They made the nightly news yesterday for something other than a scandal at North Carolina or Miami.

That’s about all I see for them.

The biggest two barometers of just how bad this deal is for the ACC are 1.  the reaction of the CTU and FSU fanbases, and 2.  – well lets wait on #2 for a moment.  Although this is only anecdotal evidence, I can report that local talk show callers to WCCP are in full-fledged revolt mode over this deal.  Many seriously believed that the SEC or Big 12 were about to offer the Tigers a slot, and this seems to all but close off that possibility.  FSU alumni that I”ve spoken with are excited about playing the Irish a couple of times a decade in football, but seem to think they could have negotiated that deal on their own without Swofford’s additional conditions.

Oh, and back to the 2nd bad barometer.  I’ll quote from the ACC official press release:

In addition to extending an invitation to Notre Dame, the Council of Presidents voted to increase the conference exit fees to three times the annual operating budget. Currently this would equate to an exit fee of over $50 million.

Why would the conference need to add this draconian penalty for leaving?  It’s not a sign of healthy conference relationships, obviously.  As you may already know, the SEC has NO exit fee – ZERO.  If you want to leave, you are welcomed to leave.  But the ACC is basically threatening its member institutions with athletic budget suicide in order to keep them at home.

Anyone else think that Notre Dame is exempt from this provision?

How do we top Dabo in his religion-pimping, self-promotional, faux-piety disingenuity?  Let’s pray it doesn’t come to this:

TRC Roundtable is a recurring feature wherein we review various hot issues, in rapid-fire-no-holds-barred style reminiscent of MSNBC’s Hardball or a Gman family reunion.

Buck:  First thought:  thousand bucks says Lattimore gets the first touch tonight on offense.

Tbone:  Good call.

Gman:  Nope, Shaq on a reverse – recruiting promise.

Tbone:  I’ve got it:  Shaw under center,  surveys field,  calls timeout.  Coming out of timeout we have a delay of game.  Then a false start.   /begins sobbing.

Buck:  Play action to 21, then deep to Byrd.  Would be money.

Gman:  The HBC does like the bomb early.  Anyone remember his first playcall at SC?

Tbone:  Whitesides, deep.

Gman: Bingo.  So its something to watch for.

Tbone:  How bout we come out in standard 2 TE set, but flex Buster out wide.  Seam route for 6.

Gman:  Or that TE drag route he likes so much.  I love that play.

Tbone:  That or PA and sneak 21 out into the flat.  That’s an HBC fav.

Buck:  We’ll run at least one jet sweep to 3 in each half.  Mark it down.

Tbone:  But what about defense?  How is Whammy gonna call it?

Buck:  Heat.  Early and Often.

Tbone:  Naw, I say wait and see how we do with just the front 4.

Buck:  [word omitted, roughly translates as “whimp”].

Tbone:  Hey, wait!  I thought we were in the nest?  Are we not?

[. . . this segment redacted as Old School quote and giggle fest follows for 10 minutes . . .]

Tbone:  /clears throat /wipes eyes . . . So what else on D?

Gman:  Oh, I predict at least one personal foul on DJ for a late hit.

Tbone:  That’s a given.  A given.

Gman:  Look for Vandy to double 7, and for 98 to have a monster night.

Tbone:  Man, I hope no one shows this post to the Vandy coaching staff!

Buck:  Yeah, they might hurt themselves laughing.  

fin