I've always thought of those powers as more of a formality. But at least it provides another level of checks, balances, and financial accountability.
If they take Alex English off the Trustee's
- Thread starter saltlifeGamecock
- Start date
I've always thought of those powers as more of a formality. But at least it provides another level of checks, balances, and financial accountability.
Of course. I agree. But the premise has been that somehow the BOT in their capacity as overseers are destroying the AD and causing the failures of out athletic teams. This is totally preposterous.
The only items I see with BOT vis a vis athletics in general was the folly of leaving the ACC, and the no-brainer to join the SEC.
But wasn't there a Trustee from Florence who held a grudge against Coastal Carolina for leaving the USC system, and used his influence to keep USC from scheduling any athletic contests with the Chanticleers for many years?
In the midst of the disastrous 2019 season (that would prove to be Muschamp's second most embarrassing campaign), David Cloninger was in 107.5.
He said he had spoken to a Board member and asked him if the BOT would approve of firing Muschamp with only the 4 wins. He said the member's answer was an unequivocal "no."
Imagine how much damage could've possibly been mitigated if he would've been fired before this last nightmarish season?
Leaving the ACC was a very popular move at the time. Both Deitzel and Frank McGuire were in favor of it as was most of the fan base. It was ultimately a good move as we would have never gotten into the SEC if not for leaving the ACC. We are far better off financially now than we would have been.
As far a Coastal Carolina, I don't know if that is correct or not, but I do know it is completely immaterial to either program. They became independent in 1993 but did not have a football team until 1999 at which time they were a 1-AA program. They did not become FBS until 2018. So the departure had nothing at all to do with either athletic program.
I disagree with your assessment that we would not have joined the SEC had we stayed in the ACC another 20 years. As I stated in a previous post on this thread, look at aTm, Mizzou, and Maryland, leaving P5 conferences for another. Plus, McGuire was not in favour of leaving the league as much as was publicized. If it was left up to Frank, USC would have stayed in the ACC. But he was not the AD; he and Dietzel did not get along, but his hands were tied on this one.
My description of Coastal was all about BOT interference in the running of the Athletics Department. It had nothing to do with USC leaving or joining an athletic conference. Said trustee took exception to Coastal leaving the USC system. His grudge was so intense that he used his influence to keep USC from scheduling Coastal in any sport. My apologies if I was not clear on this in my previous post.
Yes, it's a BOT decision to join or leave an athletic conference. It is not a BOT (or an individual trustee) decision to tell the AD or a coach which schools a team must, can, and cannot schedule. That should go no higher than the AD.
Last edited:
I was here. I don’t disagree with a single word you say. It was devastating for basketball for sure.
Well said @Gamecock Lifer Thank you. Totally agree.
I totally disagree with you assertion that McGuire not in favor of leaving the ACC. Why? Because I was there and I heard it from his own mouth time and time again. The rules were grossly unfair and greatly benefited the NC schools who effectively ran the conference. He hated the ACC as he got screwed over by them time and time again.
We would have never been asked to join the SEC if we were in the ACC. Why would they? If they were going to ask an ACC school to leave the conference, why wouldn't they ask Clemsux who had already won an mythical NC, or NC who had more resources than USC? The only reason we were asked is because we were an independent and we made geographical sense to the rest of the conference at the time.
As far as Coastal we were not going to schedule them anyway. They didn't even have a football team until 1999 - 6years after the split. And then they were a terrible team in 1 AA. It made no sense at the time to schedule them for anything. We already had Furman, SC State, and Citadel as more competitive 1 AA teams to schedule if we wanted an in state school to play. Coastal was worse than most D II schools at that time.
The question you have to ask yourself... How long has he been on the board and what has be brought to the table? You can say that for all the members of the board..
I was there, and I heard Frank say that too. What was he supposed to say? Again, if it was up to Frank, I doubt we'd have left. But it wasn't up to him. It was up to the AD to make such a recommendation to the BOT.
UnCarolina is not leaving the ACC. Never was. Never will. Period. Poor example. Clemron, on the other hand, is a good example.
If we were still in the ACC in the early 90's and the SEC re-expanded, I'll bet that the political situation would have been such that the SEC would have been advised that they would have to invite both USC and Clemron to join, not unlike pressure the ACC received 15 years ago to extend an invitation to VPI.
I said nothing about Coastal's football program. My remarks regarding Coastal have nothing to do with any specific sport.
If we can schedule in-state schools such as El Cid, Wofford, SCSU, Furman, Winthrop, etc. in basketball, baseball, tennis, golf, etc. (and yes, I know that SCSU dropped yard in the mid 70s, and Furman just did), there's no overt reason to not add the Chants to the mix. Unless, of course, you have a Trustee with an ax to grind over "disloyalty" at Coastal leaving the USC system, who interferes with the workings of the Athletic Department, and insists that we schedule Coastal in absolutely nothing. Whether or not it makes sense to schedule them in anything is beside the point I'm making: it's an internal Athletic Department matter, not one for the BOT. This trustee overstepped his bounds, and it provides an example to those posters who oppose BOT meddling.
But Frank didn't just say it, he was passionate about it. He was really angry with the ACC at the time.
My comments were not limited to football either. I just used that as a good example. CC did not add other sports all at once. They did so gradually. Also, even though they were 1 AA they were terrible in most sports. They frequently got beat by D-II teams. There was no way we were going to schedule them. Also, if you recall, there was a time when any games played against 1 AA schools were counted against you when playoff time came around. Later they changed it so you could schedule one 1 AA school and it wouldn't count against you. So what were we to do? Cancel games with traditional SC schools like Citadel and SC State, just so we could play CC? Since they became D-1 FBS we have scheduled them in most sports from time to time. Not playing them early on did not harm our AD at all. In fact, if we still didn't play them it would have little effect on our AD. It would hurt them as they wouldn't get the big paydays, but not us.
Exactly the same as I remember,,,,,,and the supposed reason we left the ACC was resolved within a year afterward. Clemson knew it was being resolved and chose to stay in the ACC....and, unless we were completely blind, you can't convince me we didn't either.
Baseball was the sport that we wanted to play them in....and they were anything but terrible in baseball at that time.
IIRC McGuire was angry about the admission of one recruit....a recruit that leaving the conference did not help us in getting in. The academic requirements were in the process of being changed at the time to bring them into compliance with the NCAA requirements.....that is why Clemson chose not to leave the conference.
He was angry about a number of issues. The tournament setup, recruiting, the domination of NC schools setting rules to benefit themselves, etc. He was especially angry the year we had the best team in the nation and could not play in the NCAA tournament.
IIRC that had absolutely nothing to do with conference affiliation...that had to do with NCAA rules on who got into the tournament. Nothing to be upset at the ACC or any other conference on that one.
What was he angry about regarding the tournament setup? I believe it was pretty much the same way all other conferences set up their tournament.
For one thing the tournament was always held in Greensboro, which was essentially a home game for all the NC schools.
So the same thing that Clemson Virginia, and Maryland had to deal with. Big deal....SEC wasn't rotating at that time either....don't think many conferences were.
The board is too political primarily because of the governor's role on it. The governor does not need a spot on the board. Period.
So are you trying to say he wasn't upset about it or are you just trying to argue a moot point?
He was upset over the academic requirements for recruiting, especially losing Mike Grosso because of it. The tournament was hardly ever mentioned even at that time....this is the first I've heard he didn't like it, it has never been mentioned as any reason he left....everyone had to deal with the fact it was in Greensboro. Dietzel on the other hand was ticked off with the ACC due to the punishment for recruiting improprieties under Bass which were completed after Dietzel took over and the continued academic requirements which kept Dietzel from being able to recruit quite a few players. McGuire had a love/hate relationship with the ACC...he would've never left as even then the rivalries were too important for his program. Dietzel's relationship was hate/hate from the beginning of his tenure.
Here is a very good article on us leaving the SEC and the issues that led up to that decision:
Storms in the Southland – Why the University of South Carolina Left the ACC
An excerpt from the upcoming book, “The Wilderness – University of South Carolina Athletics in the Independent Era – 1971-1991” The Dietzel Era Begins “A New Era In USC…
southbysoutheast.blog
Last edited:
Thanks for the link, that is a fantastic article on a important part of our history, a part that is unfortunately losing the people that participated as time passes.
I've really enjoyed the civil and educational back and forth on this topic between several posters on both sides.
Not exactly correct. Each conference could only seen one representative; it was up to the conference to determine whom they sent. Some conferences sent the regular season champion. The PAC-12, for instance, didn't even have tournament until 1987.
What was the falling out over?
Was it the state mandated retirement age or something else?
Then you must not have been there at the time. You didn't watch the FG shows and listen to his interviews. He was indeed very upset. He was more upset than Dietzel. Dietzel had won an ACC championship. His biggest beef was the restrictive recruiting requirements. Freddie Soloman was the face of that complaint, although not the only example. McGuire on the other hand was furious with the ACC over a variety of issues. Recruiting was probably the least of those. The NC Schools controlled every thing and all rules were made to their benefit. After beating every ACC school twice but losing a game in the tournament cost him a trip to the NCAA when he had the best team in the country. It was totally unfair and he knew it.He was upset over the academic requirements for recruiting, especially losing Mike Grosso because of it. The tournament was hardly ever mentioned even at that time....this is the first I've heard he didn't like it, it has never been mentioned as any reason he left....everyone had to deal with the fact it was in Greensboro. Dietzel on the other hand was ticked off with the ACC due to the punishment for recruiting improprieties under Bass which were completed after Dietzel took over and the continued academic requirements which kept Dietzel from being able to recruit quite a few players. McGuire had a love/hate relationship with the ACC...he would've never left as even then the rivalries were too important for his program. Dietzel's relationship was hate/hate from the beginning of his tenure.
Here is a very good article on us leaving the SEC and the issues that led up to that decision:
Storms in the Southland – Why the University of South Carolina Left the ACC
An excerpt from the upcoming book, “The Wilderness – University of South Carolina Athletics in the Independent Era – 1971-1991” The Dietzel Era Begins “A New Era In USC…
You may be correct, but again, my point is that these are decisions made by the head coach of the specific sport (and again, you emphasize football where I place no emphasis on any one sport) and the athletic department, not a Trustee.
Of course you don't cancel games with one in-state school to play another; you add the additional school to the mix over time.
Clemron wisely took a "wait and see" approach.
In 1964, the ACC adopted a rule which prohibited a football or basketball athlete who did not score at least an 800 on the SAT from receiving an athletic scholarship.
Regarding Mike Grosso (who scored 789 at best), McGuire found a loophole: get someone else to pay Mike's tuition; in this case it became his uncle.
Now many around the league felt that McGuire's tactic violated the spirit (if not the letter) of the rule. McGuire's biggest nemesis was Dook AD Eddie Cameron (for whom the indoor stadium in Durham is named).
Cameron made it his business to get Grosso ineligible. It was war between Cameron and McGuire, and USC was merely in the crossfire.
Cameron did get the rule amended such that an athlete had to score an 800 on the SAT to be eligible to play football or basketball period, regardless of who funded tuition for the student. The problem is that he had it applied retroactively to Grosso rather than grandfathering him in.
He was upset over the academic requirements for recruiting, especially losing Mike Grosso because of it. The tournament was hardly ever mentioned even at that time....this is the first I've heard he didn't like it, it has never been mentioned as any reason he left....everyone had to deal with the fact it was in Greensboro. Dietzel on the other hand was ticked off with the ACC due to the punishment for recruiting improprieties under Bass which were completed after Dietzel took over and the continued academic requirements which kept Dietzel from being able to recruit quite a few players. McGuire had a love/hate relationship with the ACC...he would've never left as even then the rivalries were too important for his program. Dietzel's relationship was hate/hate from the beginning of his tenure.
Here is a very good article on us leaving the SEC and the issues that led up to that decision:
Storms in the Southland – Why the University of South Carolina Left the ACC
An excerpt from the upcoming book, “The Wilderness – University of South Carolina Athletics in the Independent Era – 1971-1991” The Dietzel Era Begins “A New Era In USC…
That is a very good article. Pretty even-handed. Does a good job of describing the animosity between Cameron and McGuire.
Even the lowering of academic requirements made no difference in USC's football woes.
Last edited:
No, it wasn't. From league inception through 1966, the basketball tournament was held at Reynolds Coliseum on the NCSU campus, which had the most seating of any arena in the area (okay Cole Field House in College Park had a ~15k capacity as opposed to ~12k at Reynolds, but is was not centrally located. It was essentially a home game Similarly why, IMO, the SEC continues to hold the Baseball tournament in Birmingham each season).
The tournament was held in Greensboro in 1967, in the very old Charlotte Coliseum from 1968-1970, and in Greensboro in 1971. 1966 was the last year it was held on a campus site.
