Realignment II: "Don't Change The Subject..."

Hamish: “Is your father a ghost, or do you converse with the Almighty?”
Stephen: “In order to find his equal, an Irishman is forced to talk to God. [Looking heavenward.] Yes, Father! [To William and his men.] The Almighty says don’t change the subject, just answer the #$^*&@! question.”
     —Braveheart

The ACC responded to the Big East’s suit this morning, with a story that was clearly timed for the major regional newspapers’ Monday press run. ACC commissioner (and former North Carolina AD) John Swofford released a statement taking a swipe at Virginia Tech, claiming VT had had discussions with the ACC on May 6.

That may be true, but is non-responsive and has zero impact on the merits of the lawsuit. Virginia Tech’s actions were completely above-board throughout — shoot, VT AD Jim Weaver talked to the press before the meeting with the ACC, detailing exactly what VT’s plans and hopes were — that we wanted to stay in the Big East, but if ACC expansion happened, we would certainly like to be a part of it. Virginia Tech’s position was very similar to that of Syracuse, only slightly more proactive.

Try finding a Miami announcement like Weaver’s from close to a year ago, when the discussions really started. You won’t. All you’ll find are Shalala’s assurances that Miami was committed to the Big East. If Miami had said something like that at any point before they embarked on ACC negotiation, the lawsuit almost certainly wouldn’t have happened. Miami wouldn’t have been trusted with Big East information, Donna Shalala wouldn’t have been offered a position representing the Big East to the BCS, and the whole process would have been conducted in the light of day.

Swofford’s goal today was twofold: first, to change the tone of public debate, and second, to attempt to embarrass Virginia Tech into leaving the suit. If VT left the suit, it would enable the ACC to have the case removed from Connecticut to federal court, because the only shared jurisdiction between plaintiffs and defendants is between VT and the ACC — as an unincorporated membership organization, the ACC takes on citizenship in every state in which it has a member, including Virginia (per TSL’s LegalHokie). I can’t tell what the likelihood of the first happening is, but the likelihood of VT pulling out is darn near zero.

There was some talk Sunday that several ACC presidents might be wavering as a result of the BE suit. If public debate were shifted to VT’s supposed hypocrisy, it would take heat off them — and especially off UVa President John Casteen, who had to deal with major pressure on VT’s behalf from Virginia Gov. Mark Warner during the initial vote sequence.

It won’t fly, though. A UConn board poster said it best Saturday — the good ol’ boys in the ACC thought they could screw us in a Southern back room deal, but they forgot that when Northerners get angry, they just send flocks of lawyers after you. Despite my being a Southerner, I’m starting to appreciate that way of doing business.

The only problem for pseudo-pundits like me is that now all the information coming out will be filtered through lawyers, making the participants’ true intents more difficult to decipher.

UPDATE, 9 June 2003, 2345 EDT: the Atlanta Journal-Constitution has confirmed my suspicion that Casteen is now in a very tight crack, as Duke President Nan Keohane has switched (temporarily) to a NO and UNC Chancellor James Moeser has also said he is “not ready” to support expansion. If Swofford demands a Tuesday vote, this could be VERY interesting — we now have the Virginia political pressure working counter to Swofford’s desire not to let the d$#@Yankee lawyers get in his way.