Conference 7.286::sports_91

    
    	Clemson + Refs =  Win
    
    	Clemson + $$$$ =  Win
    
    	Clemson + Rock =  Win
    
    BTW,
    
    All of these things are only at the home games...
    
    To heck with Clemson! Booooo! :*)
    
    B.A.
    

    Clemson sucks.
    
    'Nuff said.
    
    HTH
    
    NAZZ

    HEY NAZZ,
     The only thing Clemson sucks at, is that they suck up Bowl victories
    year after year against quality football programs.
    
    Nuff said..
    
    J.R.

    > The only thing Clemson sucks at, is that they suck up Bowl victories
    > year after year against quality football programs.
    
    ...who have had an off year and instead of just going home agree to go 
    down to that ACC-sponsored Rotten Citrus Bowl or whatever it is.
    
    glenn
    

    Clemson's schedule is to laugh.  It is an insult for them to be even
    ranked in the top 100, never mind the top 20.
    
    charlie
    

    Hey Charlie, answer this for me.
    
    
    Does Clemson win their bowl games?
    
    J.R.
    

    
    Go Clemson!  Whatta team!
    
    Can we get those same Clemson refs for this week's game with Georgia
    that did the Tech game?  The ones that see a player bounce at the
    half-yard, pull the ball out from under his body and slide into
    the end zone, then all converge on the player signalling the winning 
    touchdown!  Whatta team!  ;-)
    
    glenn
      
    

    Tiggers have a tough one this week at Georgia on ESPN.  Clemson must
    have a helluva defense.
    
    Joe

 Sigh ... Life as a Wahoo fan ... 
 
 Tech's kicker Scott Sisson has five last-second killer field goals on
 his resume ... two of 'em, of course, against the hugely overrated
 and entirely undeserving Cavaliers.
 
 So, does Sisson kill Clemson, too ???    But, no, he misses wide
 right and Tech goes down in flames.
 
 Bob Hunt

    
    	Clemson will kill the Dawgs!  
    
    Bob, I was pulling for Sission this time...but not against the
    yahoos...FWIW...:*)
    
    B.A.

    
    	Richard Smith..you guys remeber him don't you? Mr.Clemson? Well,
    he's said for someone to get hold of Bob Hunt and tell him that he's
    *real* sorry that his tigers came back and beat up his Wahoos.
    
    	I told him that Charlotte had been wiped out, and he was sadden by
    this news as the rest of us were.
    
    	So , from Rich, here's a big GO TIGERS!
    
    B.A.

    I thought I heard on the radio this morning that Clemson got whacked
    accross the knuckles by the NCAA after it's investigation. 
    
    It looks like the REFS. couldn't save them this time.
    
    Conan
    

                                   -< true? >-

Yep..... Two year(?) probation.......

    How come they are only being monitored (slapped up side the head for
    getting caught) in thier recruting practices but can still play post
    season matches?
    
    
    

    
    Is this probation for the basketball team?
    Thought I heard that.
    
    MikeL
    

The big news outta this story is that Clemson coulda got the death
penalty and many might wonder why they didn't. Seriously folks,
Clemson's been in trouble with the NCAA for as long as I can remember.
And they've shown their real depth and flexibility by getting caught in
several sports and several coaches.

Actually, the reason given is that Clemson reported all the violations
and evidently this sometimes matters to the NCAA.

TTom

    The verdict in the Clemson case was very similar to the Syracuse
    decision and seem to reflect a change in philosophy by the NCAA's.
    (Speculation is they reflect the handiwork of the new NCAA-prez whose
    name escapes me.  He's the former Virginia AD who's found himself on
    the hot seat lately because of some very questionable loan practicies
    implemented at Virginia that gave preferential treatment to athletes. 
    Makes ya feel like the NCAA is in capable hands, huh?!  [NOT!])
    
    Anyway the basic philosophy is to try to punish the university
    *without* the players who are presumably innocent victims.  Without a
    doubt the biggest punishment you can levy on a player is to pull the
    plug on television.  Supposedly this is why they didn't do this in
    either case.
    
    All I can say is BAH!  There are two (2) reasons the NCAA is doing what
    it's doing, and neither has a doggone thing to do with its supposedly
    altruistic concern for the "student-athlete":
    
    1. Money.  Take a Syracuse off the tube and you're talking about big
       bucks.  The NCAA is in bed with the networks and, what with huge
       paper losses mounting, can ill afford one of the premier programs
       in America being knocked off the airways.  Clemson is less a draw
       nationally, but when you consider they play in the premier
       conference in America and play glamour/big-draw schools like Duke
       and North Carolina twice, wail, the bucks are significant.
    
    2. Lawsuits.  Consider for a moment the potential suit that could be
       made by a hoops player denied the opportunity to play on TV,
       therefore limiting (or possibly *e*liminating) his potential
       livelihood in professional hoops.  Face it, TV is exposure, and
       schools with the most TV exposure are far more likely to have their
       kids drafted high, or drafted at all.
    
    Hope this clarifies things for everyone.
    
    
    - ACC Chris
    
      

Mark today down in the calendar boys and girls...Mr Knorr actually admitted that
the Big East has one to the premier programs in America...my my my my....

 the time away cost him folks he's slipping.......

 

    I have the greatest respect for many of teams in the Northeast
    Corridor.  Syracuse, Providence, Georgetown, Villanova, ... they've all
    got great hoops history that predates the BigTVEast.
    
    My gripe has always been the instantaneous equation of this fine
    collection of independent schools (read: "The Big East") with a
    conference like the ACC, which has been around for decades and built up
    some of the truly great rivalries in collegiate sports.
    
    It ain't the same thing, people.  True, if the BigEast were able to
    maintain the high level of play it atained in the mid-80's (relative to
    the ACC) the rivalries/conference_quality might start to encroach, but
    the fall-off in recruiting combined by the dull style of play has, for
    all intensive purposes, left the BigLeast in the dust.  :^)
    
    
    - ACC Chris

Chris -

The ACC has had periods when it didn't have any Final 4 or Great 8
teams.   It happens to all conferences.

It seems that by your equation, there can never be new leagues.  Like it
or not, the Big East *is* a premier conference.   The history of the
ACC has no bearing on this year, for instance, then the fact that 
UCLA won all those champeenships a few decades ago.  

And remember, the ACC and the Big10 get more money from TV than the 
Big East (and more appearances, from a report last year) - so all
the major conferences are 'TV conferences' now.

If the Big East wasn't formed, the independent schools would have probably
joined other conferences, because I doubt they could have done any
recruiting.

JD

    Ain't never said there can't be a new league.  All I'm saying is:
    
    ACC > BigEast
    ACC > new_league
    
    Additional clarification: It ain't the BigEast I don't like.  It's all
    them chest-thumping NorthEastCorridor types who think college
    basketball wasn't played until the Almight BigEast came along.
    
    humbly,
    
    - ACC Chris

The Big East filled a void in this area of the country.

Just because it doesn't have the "tradition" of the ACC doesn't mean it's
not a good conference.   Tradition comes from someplace, I mean, even
the ACC started at some point in time.

It's like with professional leagues and expansion.   The Hartford Whalers
vs Boston Bruins rivalray came about after the 1979 merger, but that doesn't
make it any less interesting than say the Broons Rangers or Broon Habs
series.....


'Saw

        The fact of the matter, as I see it, is that the incredible
       success of the Big East since its inception is probably the
       single biggest factor in the popularity of college basketball 
       today. If for no other reason than sheer demographics. Before 
       the advent of the Big East it was easier to find a pool game on 
       tv than a college basketball game but once the rivalries started 
       amongst schools from some of the biggest markets in the country all 
       that changed. All of a sudden college hoops was transformed. Twenty 
       years ago nobody but nobody wore baseball caps of there favorite 
       college hoops team, now such caps are de rigeur amongst teen-aged boys 
       from Lowell to Los Angeles and the Big East is a big reason why. The 
       ACC may have tradition on its side but the Big East has the strength 
       of numbers with teams in New York, Philly, Boston, DC, Syracuse, Jersey,
       Connecticut, Providence, Pittsburgh and now Miami. Those are numbers
       the ACC cannot compete with - no other conference can either.
    
   
       BTW - Chris, a fan of Dean Smith calling other school's basketball 
             dull ?
    

    re: .24
    
    I should take that note and frame it, cause it's the definition of
    NorthEastCorridorChestThumper(tm).
    
    BTW Mr. Brydie, calling UNC basketball dull makes me question your
    expertise.  I'm assuming you're associating dull with the 4Corners,
    which hasn't been a significant part of the Carolina offense for over a
    decade.  North Carolina plays uptempo basketball (score easily into the
    80's - higher if the opposition will run with us) and plays pressure
    man-to-man, trapping defense, for the most part.  The offense is crisp
    with plenty of passing.  None of this sounds like the ingredients to a
    "boring" team to watch, and not many college hoops people I know
    consider North Carolina a boring team to watch.
    
    HTH,
    
    - ACC Chris

Additional clarification: It ain't the Tar Heels I don't like.  It's all
them chest-thumping No Carolina wannabees who think college
basketball wasn't played until Dean Smith came along.

TTom

    re .25
    
    >> I should take that note and frame it, cause it's the definition of
    >> NorthEastCorridorChestThumper(tm).
    
       I'd be honored.

    >> I'm assuming you're associating dull with the 4Corners, which hasn't 
    >> been a significant part of the Carolina offense for over a decade.  
 
       Only because the NCAA felt that they had to legislate it out of
       existence otherwise Dean would still be clinging to it.

    >> North Carolina plays uptempo basketball (score easily into the
    >> 80's - higher if the opposition will run with us) 

       Well, they didn't manage 80 against mighty Virginia Tech so I guess
       they don't do it all that "easily".

    >> None of this sounds like the ingredients to a
    >> "boring" team to watch, and not many college hoops people I know
    >> consider North Carolina a boring team to watch.
    
       I bet all the "many college hoops people" that you know consider Dean 
       a helluva coach, too. Kinda puts it in perspective.
  
    

    Can we please keep the ACC/Big East stuff to their appropriate topics.

Chris -

>> ACC > BigEast


Well lets see, if your rate it on corrupt coaches who try to cover up
the drug use and abuse of a star player (See Lefty D.)

A school habitually in trouble wif the NCAA (Clems..)

A school headed by a coach that plays woman-beaters and regulary chokes
despite having the greatest recruiting in the land (UNC)

Another school that has been beset by NCAA probes, had 'stars' that
steal stereos, and offered bogus grades (NCstate)

Shall I go on?  

JD

Article: 9553
From: clarinews@clarinet.com (UPI)
Newsgroups: clari.sports.misc,clari.sports.top
Subject: Clemson basketball team placed on probation
Date: Wed, 9 Dec 92 13:59:49 PST
 
	OVERLAND PARK, Kan. (UPI) -- Clemson University's athletics program
was placed on probation for two years Wednesday by the NCAA for major
violations in its men's basketball program.
	The school, however, avoided such major penalties as a ban from
postseason play and the loss of television opportunities for one year.
	The violations involved the use of an ineligible player, Wayne
Buckingham, during the 1990 NCAA basketball championships. As a result,
Clemson was forced to forfeit the two games it won during the
championship against Brigham Young and LaSalle and to repay half the
money, or about $350,000, it received for its participation in the
postseason competition.
	Len Gordy, an assistant basketball coach who was implicated by the
NCAA for another violation, resigned from Clemson during the summer.
	Buckingham, a freshman at the time, was a Clemson reserve during the
1989-90 season. He was ruled ineligible by the NCAA based on his
transcripts coming out of high school.
	After sitting out the 1990-91 campaign, Buckingham, a center-forward,
once again is a reserve for the Tigers this season and has averaged 6.5
minutes playing time in two games.
	The NCAA decided against a ban on post-season play and TV appearances
``because of the limited number of violations, the university's
investigation, its compliance program, its self-imposition of
appropriate penalties and its cooperation in the investigation.''
	Other sanctions imposed on Clemson's men's basketball team by the
NCAA Committee on Infractions were the prohibition of any expense-paid
visits for prospective student-athletes and a limit of two expense-paid
visits to campus for prospective student-athletes during the 1994
calendar year.
	In addition, the university imposed some penalties on itself which
were endorsed by the committee:
	--The assistant's position held by Gordy will not be filled before
July 1, 1993, leaving the university with one assistant coach during the
1992-93 academic year.
	--The elimination of all off-campus recruiting activities from Aug. 7,
1992, to Aug. 6, 1993.
	--The reduction of athletically related financial aid awards in men's
basketball to 13 during the 1992-93 academic year and 12 during the
1993-94 academic year.