ACC Football 2012: League Opens Itself to Criticism in Reprimanding UNC

It came out Friday that the Atlantic Coast Conference was merely going to issue a public reprimand to the University of North Carolina following the NCAA sanctions that were levied over a month ago. John Swofford and the league office elected not to extend the punishment for the Tar Heels. In the grand scheme of college sports, this is not a big deal; Ohio State and USC did not receive excess punishment from the Big Ten and Pac-12 for their missteps. The conferences need their teams to go out and win games, be on television, go to bowls and ultimately help make that money; so it stands to reason more punishment is not in the league's best interest.

The reason this North Carolina decision is interesting is because of the the history behind the ACC and more so John Swofford specifically. Swofford's Friday statement:

"

"The ACC's balance of academics, athletics and integrity will continue to be the cornerstones by which this league operates," ACC commissioner John Swofford said. "As I have said previously, it is disturbing anytime one of our member institutions has NCAA infractions issues. Such issues are counter to the goals and aspirations of our conference."

"

On the surface, pretty standard. The issue comes with the fact that John Swofford made that claim. Swofford was the athletic director at North Carolina during Clemson's 1982 NCAA sanctions period. The same John Swofford who helped force an extra year of sanctions on the Tigers because of the embarrassment that the team brought to the league.

Clemson had recruiting violations and were far lower on the spectrum from where the North Carolina Tar Heels fell as rule breakers. With the Heels, we're not looking at extra benefits to high schoolers and illegal contact with recruits. At North Carolina, we're dealing with enrolled student-athletes accepting benefits, a coach working with an agent and a tutor on staff for the head coach helping players commit academic fraud.

These are all things that fall pretty directly in opposition to the mission of the ACC which emphasizes integrity and academics. So where is the additional punishment for North Carolina? Surely, the same man who stumped for the Tigers to be punished would do the same when another team stepped out of line in far worse fashion. But alas, Swofford does not elect to come down on the Tar Heels. Instead he issues a statement.

In collegiate athletics these things don't die and for a school like Clemson, who absorbed a tremendous blow in 1982, this is an issue that is still large in their minds. Although the Heels' treatment by the league is likely a sign of the times more than a special case of John Swofford love;the league is opened up to the criticism. Inconsistency in their governing is the sort of thing that keeps the folks in Tallahassee and Clemson eying the SEC and Big XII as escape routes. It will be interesting to see how this works underneath the surface as both of the aforementioned schools are none too happy with the current leadership.