ACC presidents issue statement reaffirming schools' commitment to league

'We want to be clear that the speculation about ACC schools in negotiations or considering alternatives to the ACC are totally false'

Clemson University President Jim Barker speaks at a Friday meeting with the Board of Trustees.

Photo by Mike Ellis

Clemson University President Jim Barker speaks at a Friday meeting with the Board of Trustees.

The ACC's Council of Presidents on Thursday released the following statement, in hopes of quieting rumors of conference members looking to join other conferences:

“We, the undersigned presidents of the Atlantic Coast Conference, wish to express our commitment to preserve and protect the future of our outstanding league. We want to be clear that the speculation about ACC schools in negotiations or considering alternatives to the ACC are totally false. The presidents of the ACC are united in our commitment to a strong and enduring conference. The ACC has long been a leader in intercollegiate athletics, both academically and athletically, and the constitution of our existing and future member schools will maintain the ACC’s position as one of the nation’s premier conferences.”

Fr. William Leahy, Boston College

Mr. James Barker, Clemson University

Dr. Richard Brodhead, Duke University

Dr. Eric Barron, Florida State University

Dr. G.P. “Bud” Peterson, Georgia Institute of Technology

Dr. James Ramsey, University of Louisville

Dr. Donna Shalala, University of Miami

Dr. Holden Thorp, University of North Carolina

Dr. Randy Woodson, North Carolina State University

Fr. John Jenkins, University of Notre Dame

Dr. Mark Nordenberg, University of Pittsburgh

Dr. Nancy Cantor, Syracuse University

Dr. Teresa Sullivan, University of Virginia

Dr. Charles Steger, Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University

Dr. Nathan Hatch, Wake Forest University

© 2012 OrangeAndWhite.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

  • Discuss
  • Print

Comments » 5

brookesdad729 writes:

Really? I guess that $50 million dollar incentive to stay probably has nothing to do with it huh? Riiiiiight!

Bigboots writes:

What a shame. Clemson needs to be out of the ACC. Already.
I wouldn't have signed a D@/& thing. Why would you?

michtiger writes:

Thatt is a good pledge but what happens if a court gives Md relief from the $50m fee. Since this fee is so out of line with other exit fees it seems likely a judge would agree that Md leaving has an impact but not to that level. and reduce the fee. Remember rutgers is suing the Big East over the $10m fee and they filed to give credibility to their new friend Md in the big ten. If the fee is cut it seems clear FSU will take off and CU will be in a bind. We have put all our marbles in FB in a BB conference. The ACC does not give our players and coaches enough tough games to develop.

TrevorT writes:

in response to michtiger:

Thatt is a good pledge but what happens if a court gives Md relief from the $50m fee. Since this fee is so out of line with other exit fees it seems likely a judge would agree that Md leaving has an impact but not to that level. and reduce the fee. Remember rutgers is suing the Big East over the $10m fee and they filed to give credibility to their new friend Md in the big ten. If the fee is cut it seems clear FSU will take off and CU will be in a bind. We have put all our marbles in FB in a BB conference. The ACC does not give our players and coaches enough tough games to develop.

I doubt FSU is going anywhere soon, but even if they did why would that put Clemson in a bind? People keep talking like Clemson and FSU are the only teams left in the conference. Sure, times are tough now, but do you really think schools like Miami, VT, and GT are never going to have another good football team? I can't see it.

kellytown writes:

in response to michtiger:

Thatt is a good pledge but what happens if a court gives Md relief from the $50m fee. Since this fee is so out of line with other exit fees it seems likely a judge would agree that Md leaving has an impact but not to that level. and reduce the fee. Remember rutgers is suing the Big East over the $10m fee and they filed to give credibility to their new friend Md in the big ten. If the fee is cut it seems clear FSU will take off and CU will be in a bind. We have put all our marbles in FB in a BB conference. The ACC does not give our players and coaches enough tough games to develop.

I believe the ACC elite teams will not stay down much longer every thing evolves in life as in football. No team in the ACC is going any where. well with the exception of Maryland and what revelance have they had in the ACC in a long time. I believe that with the addition of the other schools they won't be missed, I will say this however I believe that they will have to pay dearly to leave the ACC. After all what is Maryland going to bring to the table in the big 10 other than scraps.

Share your thoughts

Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.

Comments can be shared on Facebook and Yahoo!. Add both options by connecting your profiles.

Features