(02-25-2015 10:54 PM)texasorange Wrote: (02-25-2015 10:49 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: (02-25-2015 10:36 PM)texasorange Wrote: I don't understand this completely. If a university is found guilty of a scandal, a bowl ban is expected. What else contributed to the black balling of VT. There has to be more to the story than this for so many schools to hold a grudge.
Once upon a time VT voted to ban bowls for ALL teams - i.e. "let's all agree to NEVER go to another bowl game ever again". Who knew how unpopular that position would be, huh? It took awhile to live that down, then a while longer - and some pull - to get back in with the conference.
Ok, that makes sense. A total bowl ban for all schools in the conference is nuts.
From 33-52 the SoCon/ACC schools played in about a dozen Orange, Sugar, Rose, and Cotton Bowls. In 52 MD was national champs. Duke should have been in 41. Football in the conference was BIG.
However the 1936 expansion brought in several smaller schools and saw UVa exit. The cheating at W&M was epic in order to make a bowl, and the VT president was under the gun by the Va legislature to curb things, plus it was his personal feeling that football was out of control.
West Va was a red-headed stepchild voted in by the small schools over MD's objection. West Va gave VT the needed vote.
MD and Clemson had no forgiveness in them for VT. Once UVa was in they wanted VT stomped out of existence. The Big Four schools sympathized with VT, but did not have the votes to add VT until 1972, however, by then GT was gone from the SEC, and by the time a formal process to go back to 8 started, it was no contest between Atlanta and Blacksburg.
VT got a formal vote in 54 that was 4-4. They got an informal vote in 65 that was 4-4. By the early 70's no one wanted to split ACC basketball tournament tickets with them.
However showing that politics are strange. It was UNC and Duke that allowed VT to play politics against UVa in 2003.
UNC and Duke played it perfect and obtained a nearby football school that travels well instead of having to compete against Syracuse in basketball.
UNC and Duke used a three step process - they announced they were against any expansion, putting MD and UVa under the gun to vote for Miami. The Swofford plan had promised the spots to Miami, Syracuse and BC. UNC, Duke, and NC State didn't want Syracuse at the time. Swofford did not consult the ptb at Duke and UNC assuming he understood the Corrigan plan for expansion.
When Duke and UNC made their announcement, VT boosters and their friends at McGurie-Woods went into action against UVa. The motion at the teleconference was made to add Miami and VT, not Miami alone, by itself. Duke and UNC voted against the measure and UVa had to vote to protect it's state funds.
With Syracuse and BC waiting, NC State made a motion to expand no further until ND was contacted. Swofford exploded, but the motion passed. Swofford had personally promised Cramauthel at Syracuse no embarrassment. When the news hit Boeheim ran his mouth. Meaning when the initial ND talks ran their course, BC would get the bid.
Other than his UNC pedigree, this is the source of Swofford hatred for NC State. We stabbed him in the back in 2003.
Always remember, UNC, Duke and WF are the master politicians within the league. When UNC and Duke get together, they almost always get what they want, but they are never ham handed about it - they are careful to create an outcome all the while publically speaking against that outcome.
The reality is that the ptb at UNC and Duke wanted VT back in the league in 2003, but they would never say that in public.
