No they didn't...

So we all know the ACC turned up its nose at West Virginia last year because -- insert nasally highbrow voice here -- the Mountaineers' academic credentials fell far short of the ACC's lofty standards.

Syracuse is in instead, and I'm sure it's a great school. But how in the heck does one explain this?

A little research produced this news story, which says the song is a parody of "Sexy and I Know It" by something called LMFAO.

At this point a large round of applause needs to go up for those of us who have never listened to LMFAO (and certainly never will after watching this video).

Maybe it's not too late to give Syracuse the boot. Maybe there's something in their contract with the ACC that says: "Thou shalt not infringe on our highbrow sensibilities by making an embarrassing video."

Would write more on this but I can't. Just speechless.

A few Wednesday links:

-- Matt Hayes reports that the BCS will shop the title game to multiple cities, and this concept will surely bring in a boatload of cash.

-- This guy says Orlando needs to work to put itself into the conversation for the title game. No thanks.

-- Al Golden says the ACC's TV deal is actually quite marvelous. Is it me, or does this seem like talking points issued directly from Greensboro? Kinda refreshing that you're not hearing the same blather from Clemson's end.

-- The Kansas City Star gives some insight into how the Champions Bowl got done. And it really presents a general primer on how all big stuff gets done. As in, not publicly.

Slive and Neinas were among 11 commissioners meeting at a New Orleans hotel the day after Alabama’s victory over LSU in the BCS National Championship Game to lay the groundwork for a new postseason structure.

“After the meeting, Mike says to me, ‘We need to talk,’ ” Neinas said. “That was the start of it.”

-- This Austin columnist thinks out loud and wonders whether the Big 12 has painted itself into a very bad corner with the Champions Bowl.

Seems the Pac-12 and Big Ten privately relished the announcement of the new SEC/Big 12 Champions Bowl, because it's possible that game could become the first game in a four-team playoff bracket, meaning the Big 12 would have given itself the kiss of death. Who in their right mind wants to open against the SEC's best team?

That's my guess why Pac-12 boss Larry Scott went to The Wall Street Journal (instant credibility) and called the move "a game-changer" (damning applause). Who wins if such seeding occurs? The Pac-12 and Big Ten, that's who. They get a lesser challenge in the "first round" with the chance to advance, guaranteeing one of them a spot in the finals. This is clearly a game of one-upsmanship.

It's your move, Big 12. I'm guessing that's also why Scott was throwing out there — again — the plus-one model after the bowl games, because that would accomplish the same thing. Either way, the Big 12 loses.

LW