Q&A with ACC Commissioner John Swofford

Needless to say, FSU fan base is very nervous about the lack of support from our own conference commish....the old saying "with friends like these......"

Plus the endless almost decade long 'study' of the conference network is not encouraging to say the least.  Pre GOR, Swofford told FSU's BOT..."this is happening"....not it is very non committal.  Basically he swindled FSU's subpar BOT.


Q&A with ACC Commissioner John Swofford



"Q: A couple of familiar topics came up at a recent FSU Board of Trustees meeting, and I wanted to get your thoughts on them. One of the trustees, Joe Gruters, expressed concern about what happened last year during the College Football Playoff selection process. Like a lot of fans down here, he was bothered by the way FSU fell to No. 4 at one point despite being undefeated, and the fact that there was even debate about whether the Seminoles would make it in to the Playoff, even though they were the defending national champions. The major concern he expressed was that narrow wins in the ACC don't seem to be valued as highly as narrow wins in other conferences, so he could see a scenario where an undefeated or one-loss ACC champion gets left out in favor of a team from another conference with the same record. With that as the backdrop, he was encouraging FSU's administration to urge the ACC to push for an eight-team playoff so that the conference doesn't get left out. My question would be now that you have seen a full cycle play out, are you concerned about that at all? And would that be a reason for the ACC to advocate for a larger playoff field?


A: Well, I think every year is going to probably be unique. After one year of a playoff, it's hard to get a sense of trends. I think another factor that probably came into play was that [FSU's non-conference opponents] Oklahoma State, Notre Dame and Florida all ended up having less-than-stellar years. And while that looked like an excellent non-conference schedule, and it was on paper, it didn't help as much at the end because of the fact that those three teams fell off some. We finished the year collectively as a league extremely well, with the 4-0 against the SEC on the last Saturday of the regular season. And then after the selections, we had Clemson's win over Oklahoma and Georgia Tech's Orange Bowl win over Mississippi State. And during the course of the season, Boston College beating Southern Cal certainly was a significant win, and Virginia Tech beating Ohio State. So there were some really good things on top of the previous year for our league that I think trend extremely well for the ACC -- and any perceptions that might be there in terms of internal quality. And the number of bowl teams we had would add to that as well.


Also, one thing you have with a selection committee is that they look at games and have an eyeball test. So I think we're going to find that each year is a little different. Certainly, if you were the Big 12 this past year, they would have liked to have had more teams in the playoff. But I don't think there's any significant support for expanding the playoff at this point in time, particularly at the presidential level. The feedback that we are getting is that the vast majority of individuals that make these decisions are completely supportive of the four teams at this point in time. And I would expect that to hold true through this 12-year contract in all probability. That remains to be seen, but there does not seem to be much momentum at all for expanding from four to eight.


Q: Another topic that was raised by a different FSU Trustee, Edward Burr, was related to the conference's progress with a cable television network. He mentioned that the conference discussed the likelihood of a cable channel happening when FSU agreed to sign the long-term Grant of Rights agreement two years ago. I know you've said recently that those discussions with ESPN aren't going to be held publicly, but do you understand why there is some anxiety there? They worry that schools in other conferences are getting additional revenue while FSU is not, and they can't take comfort in any progress that might be happening because the conference isn't sharing much information.


A: I think we understand the curiosity about it, and the desire to move as quickly as possible. Obviously, all of us involved with it want to move as quickly as possible to whatever is next. But as was indicated when we did the Grant of Rights, we put ourselves in excellent position for whatever the next step is with our television agreements. We've got an excellent partner in ESPN, and our discussions continue in that vein. We indicated at the time that this was a multiple-year process, and … whenever we take that step, it needs to be a positive step right out of the chute. And it needs to be done the right way. There have been several channel startups that have been very difficult at first, and we don't want to go backwards to go forward.


We want to come out of the chute ahead of the game from day one, if indeed we take that particular step. Those discussions are pretty much where we expected them to be when we started at this given point in time. So I understand the curiosity and the interest. The whole process is a very high priority for us, but until there's something definitive and substantive to say, it really doesn't help the process to publicly discuss it in any particular intervals, other than to say those discussions continue and are in line with where we expected them to be at this point in time. "