Maryland reaction

Assuming there's no chain reaction that leads to further ACC defections -- and right now that could be a shaky assumption -- the general reaction from Clemson fans to Maryland's departure has been, "Well ... bye."

Beyond their status as charter members of the conference, there's almost nothing in common between these two fan bases. And that much is apparent to anyone who has taken a trip to College Park for a football game.

Up there they don't give much of a rip about tailgating. And when the football program isn't doing well, they don't give much of a rip about football, period.

The unsettling thing about Maryland's defection is the sense that it's nothing more than a bailout from consequences of awful business decisions by the school's athletics department. They recently had to drop seven sports because of a budget crisis.

At Clemson, one of the biggest compliments to the athletics department over the last five or six years is that they've been smart with their money. Maybe too thrifty at times, but frugality is paying off right now with them sitting on healthy reserves and very little debt.

A small percentage of major athletics departments are making money these days, and it takes a lot of work to avoid going into the red. So imagine the reactions from these folks when they see Maryland jump at the chance for such a bailout.

I thought Pat Forde of Yahoo nailed it with this passage in yesterday's column:

Congratulations, Maryland. You have succeeded in turning a financial mess of an athletic department into a swank new home.

And congratulations to you, too, Rutgers. It appears you're next. Your reward for running up a staggering debt is a huge conference upgrade.

Location, location, location. That's what this latest round of conference realignment is about.

Two largely underachieving, financially irresponsible athletic programs are parlaying their geographic proximity to major metropolitan areas into membership in the Big Ten. They've done very little on the field of competition to deserve it. But that's not what drives conference affiliation these days.

College Sports, Inc., is no meritocracy.

Rutgers and Maryland might as well be the airline and automotive industries. They're losing money left and right, but because they have inherent value (thanks to their TV markets of New York, Washington D.C. and Baltimore), here comes the institutional bailout.

In the last decade, Maryland expanded its football stadium to 54,000 and built a palatial basketball arena in order to chase additional glory and cash. It acquired neither. While spending increased 24 percent over the last five years, according to the Washington Post, revenues increased only 15 percent.

Here's an analysis of Maryland's move, and a sobering bottom line:

Yet here Maryland stands on the precipice of severing a relationship with a conference it helped found nearly 60 years ago — not because its alumni are clamoring for it, and not because it’s in the interests of student-athletes but because it appears to remedy a bottom line that doesn’t add up.

Amid what should be a spirited, public debate, Maryland has no top administrator with a historical nor emotional tie to the ACC, having replaced its president, athletic director, football coach and men’s basketball coach in an 18-month span with four men who have no ties to the state of Maryland, its flagship university or its athletic conference.

In this piece, Maryland's president explains why he voted against the $50 million exit fee.

In Loh’s view, the $50 million charge for leaving the ACC, which equates to three times the annual operating budget, represents not an exit fee but an “exit penalty,” which Loh believes is “illegal and philosophically not a good idea.”

“The most important part is this is a great conference, and what we should be doing is making it so attractive that others want to join the conference and stay in the conference, rather than threatening them to stay,” said Loh, pointing out that the Big East’s exit fee is “something around $3 million to $5 million.”

Loh stressed that his objection stemmed solely from personal beliefs, and not a desire on Maryland’s part to protect itself in the event that it one day decides to leave the ACC. In fact, Loh repeatedly praised the relationship between Maryland and the ACC, saying that the school will continue to be a part of it for years to come.

Philosophically, however, Loh disagrees with “punishing people if they simply exit a relationship.” Loh said he checked with other administrators on campus, including Athletic Director Kevin Anderson, to inform them of his intended vote.

“The law says that when you have liquidated damages, and in advance you anticipate a breaching of the contract, we will decide what the damages will be,” Loh said. “You talk about damages, not penalties, and it has to be a reasonable estimate. That’s the law. We live in a free economy. We want people to move freely in and out of relationships. That’s the philosophical principle. What constitutes reasonable? That’s for a court to decide.

“But if the damages are so huge that it prevents the mobility, the free movement of people, then I think it’s not good for society. Others may not be looking at it from this principle, and that’s their prerogative.”

Andy Staples presents some good analysis of how and why this happened, but I don't totally agree with this statement:

This happens all the time in business. Because of economic forces, government regulation, technological advances or all of the above, things can change dramatically.

Here's what also happens in business: People get fired for the relentlessly bad financial mismanagement that put Maryland in this desperate and soul-sucking situation to begin with.

At Maryland, they get rewarded.

LW