I tried to stay above the fray. I really did.
Go back and read SFN’s comments on the topic. Note that we were very careful to focus on the failure to use replay and didn’t harp on the result of the replay; which…upon further review…indicated that Akron’s running back failed to score a touchdown on the game’s final play. All we chose to stress was the same thing the rest of the world was stressing and that the Fayetteville Observer succintly expressed:
But it doesn’t matter whether the knee of Akron running back Dennis Kennedy hit the ground before the ball broke the plane of the end zone or not. If there’s a replay system in effect and a game-deciding score on the final play happens, it SHOULD be reviewed. Otherwise, what’s the point of having such a system?
I got pretty steamed yesterday when I saw quotes from UNC-CH grad and ACC director of officials Tommy Hunt. Hunt not only refused to admit the obvious that the play shuold have been reviewed more thoroughly by the game officials; he went so far as to use terms like “clearly” to describe the situation (as if there was no doubt about anything).
Hunt’s chutzpah really bothered me. His ability and willingness to proclaim without the slightest reservation that the result of the play was so unalienably clear was an insult to everyone’s intelligence. Again, I tried not to focus on the absurdity that everything that was so obviously murky was so crystal clear to Tommy Hunt.
But, today’s comments take the cake. Check out the following quote from today’s N&O:
Everything I saw looked like he scored; all the shots we got on video look like he scored,” Hunt said Monday. “We don’t count on still pictures. They are not dependable. We always get an amateur picture [in situations like this]. A running picture is much more valuable than a still photo.”
First, I need I need Cardiff Giant on this one. Cardiff, where are you? I challenge you to satire Hunt’s comments about “Running Pictures”. Running pictures? Is this 1930? I can’t get the thought of silent movies and Charlie Chaplin out of my head. It harkens to Lee Fowler and Bobby Purcell’s disdain 21st century techonology and the evil internet. Cardiff…this is your charge!
Second, I’d like to draw your attention to Hunt’s comments in the N&O ONE DAY EARLIER!
“We only had three shots of that play and no cameras on the goal line,” said Hunt, who attended the Duke-Wake Forest game in Winston-Salem. “[But] our person in the booth can slow it down, re-run it, FRAME IT, and he said it was a touchdown. Officials [also] said it was clearly a touchdown. When I saw it on ESPN, I concurred with their call.”
Wow. Could he be more of an idiot? Seriously. No wonder the moron is being forced into retirement this year. (Hopefully John Swofford can find another Carolina grad to slide into his spot before too many people post for the position)
* On one hand, Hunt procaims that the replay officials are in a great situation because they can STOP the video to “FRAME IT”…which then becomes the equivalent of…you guessed it…A PICTURE!
* But, on the other hand, they “don’t count on still pictures” because “they are not dependable”.
So, if “still pictures” are not dependable, then why do the replay officials slow down and STOP videos to make calls?
What Hunt should be articulating (even though it would make his case look even weaker) is the importance of THE ANGLE of the picture, be it a photograph or one of these fancy “moving pictures”. I actually believe and understand his comment that, “We always get an amateur picture [in situations like this].” But, just because something is an amateur photograph doesn’t make it any less credible. The key element in this is THE ANGLE OF THE PICTURE, not the nature of it being still or moving.
Hunt has talked so much that he has admitted the problem without being smart enough to recognize it, “We only had three shots of that play and no cameras on the goal line.” He is so married to his position that he can’t admit that his cameras were NOT in as good of a position as the photograph that was taken by Chris Coker in the stands.
The problem is not the nature of the pictures; the problem is the angle of the pictures and the inability of Tommy Hunt to (insert your complaint here).
State lost. To Akron.
Yes, the TD call should have been reviewed and possibly overturned.
But in the end, State was in a position to lose and did.
To Akron. *Sigh*
^ You still don’t get it do you? It’s not the fact that we lost. It’s the fact that a system that is in place to prevent exactly what is happening here (controversy) was not even used. And to further it, the man in charge of it all (Hunt) has made a complete ass of himself in trying to defend it. Plain and simple, the play should have been reviewed. If he would just simply admit they made a mistake in not reviewing (and weren’t in that great of a position to begin with to deal with goal line situations), many of us wouldn’t have a problem. Hell, I’m sure it wouldn’t have got overturned, but if they would have at least reviewed it there wouldn’t be as big a problem as there is. They screwed up, it’s time for the head of officials to take some accountability.
^ But it was all so “clear”.
Everyday I am more and more amazed at the incompetance of people in a postion of power. How this guy an even breath much less be the head of something for the record books.
^ So funny. I just had the EXACT conversation with a UVa-grad colleague of mine.
How do we know that the final play was never reviewed?
Just because the officials on the field were never buzzed doesn’t mean that the play wasn’t reviewed by the replay official in the booth. Unless the replay official feels there is indisputable video evidence to overturn a call they wont buzz the officials on the field.
Also, I still cant see how people can tell with 100% certainty that his elbow is actually down from that picture that was posted.
Can you tell with 100% certainty that his elbow wasn’t down?
Why does the natural default say that it was “ok” to call a play a touchdown that isn’t obviously a touchdown?
Forgive State fans for being a little pissed off after Tommy Hunt and crew had no problem taking a game winning touchdown off the board (after it was called) in Chapel Hill WITHOUT THE USE OF REPLAY.
Take the first comment on this page — go back a few years — and insert another name:
State lost. To UNC
Yes, the (no) TD call should have been reviewed and possibly overturned.
But in the end, State was in a position to lose and did.
To UNC. Sigh
Critical plays bothched by officials are unfair regardless of the opponent. Great last minute plays that win a game for any opponent should be (fairly) reviewed. The ACC is covering up their goof.
^ that’s the thing. It was called a touchdown on the field so to overturn it they need to be 100% certain that his elbow was down. Without that, they’ll let the call on the field stand. Which appears to be exactly what happened.
And the exact opposite of what happened the last time we were in this situation.
Matt - If they had a camera properly positioned - they could have had definitive evidence one way or the other. They didn’t - Hunt won’t apologize, he just continues to stupidly say that the runner was “clearly” in - when the photo indicates that there was nothing clear about it. Further aggravating the point was when they showed the replay on the jumbrotron, 40K people shrieked because the replay on the grainy jumbotron showed that he may have been down.
If one thing is clear, it’s time for Swofford to remove Hunt and apologize for the pisspour handling of the final 2 plays. If that’s not clear to Swofford, then clearly, he should be removed from his job because under his tenure, NC State will not get a fair shake.
And finally, there’s this nugget:
“We don’t count on still pictures.”
I’m sure that they’ll find this interesting in Churchill Downs…
SFN: “We don’t count on still pictures….yet, we slow down and stop the video to create still pictures to make calls.”
Hey Matt E., go take a physics course and then look at that picture again. There is no way the ball made it into the endzone before his elbow touched even if it was a fraction of an inch above the ground when the picture was snapped.
After reading lots of articles on this mess, it seems to me that what Jeff said in the blog today is key: The lack of a proper camera angle prevented the correct call.
How can a replay system be in use with no cameras on the goal lines? Isn’t that the most important place? So, I heard yesterday that the officials use all camera angles available, and sometimes it may just be a scoreboard camera. Is it ESPNU’s fault there were only three camera’s? Could State prevent this by having our own stadium setup with more camera’s and different angles? It soulds to me like the play WAS reviewed, but improper camera placement prevented a conclusive option.
Interesting contradiction: Webster’s defines Hunt as “A diligent and thorough pursuit or search”; something that obviously did not happen in this case. Webster’s defines Tommy as “A loaf or piece of bread.â€? which seems to correspond with the level of intelligence of the ACC director of officials with respect to his defense of the actions of his crew on the field.
One can only assume that Tommy Hunt would be defined as “a loaf aimlessly searching for direction�.
I could not confirm this as a definition of the word Contradiction, but I think that if you look hard enough you will find it defined as “Tommy Hunt”.
I’m not an instant replay fan. Get rid of it and let the call on the field stand. I’ll take the results, good and bad.
But damn…if you’re going to have instant replay, can’t it at least be used correctly???
So if frame-by-frame review is not allowed per the genius, I wonder what the ACC mandated minimum playback speed is that is allowed in the review booth.
Is it possible this guy is campaigning for Fowler’s position?
I hate to link a Tarheel blog, but he has pretty good thoughts on the subject of Instant Replay… http://tarheelfan.wordpress.com/
its possible that everyone is a moron… I really hate to read about “officals” being everything BUT offical. They have a huge rule book… they need to FOLLOW IT! use COMMON SENSE.
every goal line tochdown should have a camera on the goal line. regardless if the score is 45-0…
who can we blame for this one?! I have no clue… who is in carge of camera placement? but I will say Hunt is an idiot for almost everything he has said so far… seems like he saw the play one time on ESPN and that is it. I bet he hasnt looked at it again since then. sad… really…
for2n8son I’ve taken plenty of physics classes thanks.
As Great Dane Guy brought up above. I’d like to see how you can make the statement that the ball couldn’t cross the line before the elbow was down from looking at a picture taken from inside the goal line and above the playing field. It’s all about the angles that we’re viewing it from. His elbow could appear be touching from the angle we’re looking at, but if we were looked at the same plane as his elbow there could be 2-3 inches there. The same goes for the angle at which we view the goal line, because of the 20 degree or so angle we’re looked at the goal line the ball might be much closer if we were looking along the plane of the goal line.
Maybe someone should develop a goal line cam that would go in the pylon or something. Even with 10-20 cameras we might not always have the best angles to correct/confirm calls.
Basically it comes down to the officials making a call on the field and there wasn’t enough evidence to overturn the call so it stood. If Chuck wanted it looked at further he’s going to have to start saving timeouts or something. Even then I think the call would have stood no matter how long they kept looking at it.
If only we had gotten our extra 18.3 plays……………One can only dream. — as Mack Brown would say.
Matt E. - You are correct - sometimes there isn’t a clear angle to review these things. It would appear that the official was in the correct position to make the call. However, the replay THEY SHOWED ON THE JUMBOTRON cast doubt on the accuracy of the call. (Not a problem, it’s a bang-bang call, and it’s difficult to get things right.)
So here’s the thing:
1) Review the call - Hunt hasn’t said that the booth reviewed the play. The officials left the field w/out an announcement that the play was being reviewed. Hunt says that they can review it.
2) Hunt should confirm whether or not the play was reviewed in the booth w/in the guidelines provided for reviewing “game-changing plays” that should be reviewed. It’s really a simple yes or no question.
3) If it wasn’t Hunt should apologize to NC State players, coaches and fans.
4) If it was, he should outline clearly the explanation for upholding the TD. (Perhaps there wasn’t enough evindence to overturn.) Perhaps all TV angles show that he’s in.
5) Finally, he should say it was a very close call and would be difficult to get right either way.
6) We should have cameras on the goal-lines, LOS and sidelines to assist officials.
Alright, I can’t stay above the fray either. Who cares? Who the hell cares if they blew the call, or if the celebration penalty hurt us? My god. The issue is we have a joke of a football program. We’re debating Akron? Akron? We’re celebrating beating AppState? Is this program improving, stagnant, or going backwards? After all these years with Chuck the mouth, I would have expected a game with Akron to be a laugher, just a tune up for the real games. Instead we’re debating a goal line call. Against Akron! This is ludicrous.
Hunt’s ridiculous statements about how “clear” it was proves the opposite point.
Both the new-phangled “moving pictures” and the still photo cast serious doubt on the TD call. And we still don’t even know if it was reviewed or not. All we get is this jackass making absurd statements about how clear it was when everyone with eyes knows it wasn’t.
That leads me to guess that it wasn’t reviewed at all and Hunt is covering his ass on the whole thing by telling us to pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, as it were.
As far as any question on his being down, I beg to differ. When you look at the expanded picture so that you have the perspective of the field and his entire body, he is far enough back from the goal line and based on the angle of his body, his trajectory would have taken him into the ground before the ball broke the plane on the line. I don’t see any question about that, personally.
Its not about the L! Its about incompetence, and this isn’t the first time. I guess you still don’t get it either, so I’ll just copy GoPack80’s post from above.
You still don’t get it do you? It’s not the fact that we lost. It’s the fact that a system that is in place to prevent exactly what is happening here (controversy) was not even used. And to further it, the man in charge of it all (Hunt) has made a complete ass of himself in trying to defend it. Plain and simple, the play should have been reviewed. If he would just simply admit they made a mistake in not reviewing (and weren’t in that great of a position to begin with to deal with goal line situations), many of us wouldn’t have a problem. Hell, I’m sure it wouldn’t have got overturned, but if they would have at least reviewed it there wouldn’t be as big a problem as there is. They screwed up, it’s time for the head of officials to take some accountability.
Mr. Hunt may I offer some advice. When in a hole STOP digging. Admit your crew’s mistake and ask forgiveness is all that is left for you at this point. The clear picture doesn’t lie.
I’m reminded of a list of quotes supposedly taken from officer fitness evaluations in the British Navy:
“This officer would be out of his depth in a car-park puddle.”
“In his last fitness evalution period, this officer hit rock bottom. Since then, he has begun to dig.”
Or as a current comedian says:
“You can’t fix stupid.”
I must have missed where someone has said that the play wasn’t reviewed?
In the college football review system every play is reviewed in the booth by the replay official. Just because the officials on the field didn’t get buzzed doesn’t mean the play wasn’t reviewed. No official on the field ever views a replay anyway, that is handled by the replay official in the booth.
College Football Replay
Some of you people talk about Akron like there an awful team. Just about any DI team can beat another any weekend. This is the reason they go out and play the games. We have played two pretty good teams to start the season but the way you guys talk it is like we lost to Prairie View. We have played two championship teams over the past two weeks which is far more than anything our football or basketball program has been in 20 years. It is no surprise when a championship team beats a lower level ACC team. I think we are lucky to have survived the App State game and arn’t 0-2.
One of these days the money guys will figure out that facilities don’t win games. Have you ever seen Cameron? How many championships has the god awful RBC Center brought us? The only thing the RBC did for State was to take away parking for the football games.
I also wanted to respond to Chucks unfortunate response in the Media Q&A yesterday. I hope to read SFN’s take on it also. Why not just respond with the typical “they played a dagum good game” and let it be?
“We have played 2 pretty good teams”. Lets see, last year the Akron Football Juggernaut lost to Army, Ball State, Central Michigan, and Miami of Ohio, while squeaking past that traditional powerhouse Buffalo 13-7.
My, how our standards have fallen.
“I must have missed where someone has said that the play wasn’t reviewed?”
Matt - he doesn’t clearly say whether it was reviewed or not. He implies that the video official looked at it, and it was so clear there was no reason to review. Of course, a photograph disputes that - as did the replay on the jumbotron.
It is a final, game changing, and terribly handled last second call. It screwed up a decent outcome from a sharply improved offense/QB and well played fourth quarter effort. Somebody in regards to the officiating definitely needs to answer and be punished with fines, suspensions, or whatever. Maybe that’s too much to ask these days, ten in minutes in time out for you Mr Official.
Let’s just say that one horrendous call, and one particularly well played quarter, does not a football game make.
But it’s a start. Overdue and much anticipated, but a damn good start. Possibly the absolutely FORCED and FIRST step in developing a total offensive package either way.
From another thread but:
I take it that the picture is just that, a single still frame. If not it should be fairly easy to tell how the elbow/arm moved in relation to rest of the player’s body in slo mo or frame by frame. Did it stop moving downward, bounce off the turf, or what? It’s not a TD at the split that photo(?) was taken either way.
I’m Cardiff Giant … and I’m reporting for duty.
Hopefully this loss will be a wake up call for all parties (including fans, coaches, players etc.) We are not as good as we think we are. We have all these highly skilled player, but yet we have no “team.” Maybe the coaches will realize it is time to get back to the basics and teach these guys how to play together and play smart, or maybe it is wishful thinking.
Link
“Akron coach J.D. Brookhart wanted nothing to do with overtime…
Both [Akron and Air Force] made bold moves, passing up potential game-tying kicks for potential game-winning plays late in close games Saturday…
And what were the chances that a close officials’ call would have gone the road team’s way in either of the those games?
Exactly.”
Does this writer(Russo) know anything about the NCSU-Akron game? That “close official’s call” did go the road team’s way in that game. The game directly contradicts the statement you finish the piece with. What kind of conclusion is that?? The only reason Akorn’s last play was a “good call” was because the close official’s call went the road team’s way.
“My, how our standards have fallen.”
From what? I don’t know how long you have been a State football fan but State football has been been pretty bad since the Dick years and we were not all that good then. You have to go back to the 70’s to when State had a football program save one season with Rivers that ended up only being an ok season.
State football hasn’t been on any kind of stage much less National since 1980. There was some hype early in Amato’s tenure but that is all it was.
^^ I think that’s a misprint. He meant to say “And what were the chances that a close officials’ call would have gone the home team’s way in either of those games?
Nonetheless, has anyone emailed this blog entry to Swofford? He should be forced to respond to this type of ridiculous double-standard.
That’s just it twhwtnc - we all bought into the hype, forked over our hard-earned $, and for what? That’s our frustration here. Akron may be an OK team, but they DO NOT compare to what NC STATE football SHOULD BE.
If you’ve seen the replay, I would be interested to know what Kennedy’s body was doing in that frame? Was he extending, in which case the elbow may have been swinging through and just the still shot makes it clear his elbow hit, where in motion it may not appear to hit.
Yes the game is over. We lost.
It was mentioned that Lee Fowler doesn’t want to make public issues out of what I’ll call “hot topics”. But I can’t help but feel that nothing’s getting done behind the scenes either by making sure the referees are reprimanded, etc. Hell, they were reprimanded after we lost two years ago at Carolina….or were they?
Fowler/Amato…someone needs to stand up for this school and make things happen. Not because they want to cry about a loss, but b/c it’s the right thing to do.
RE: Clarksa link to the tarheel replay review comments, there is a statement that 50 % of ACC refs reviewed calls are overturned!
50% overturned!!!!???? Thats why it wasn’t reviewed, and why Stone’s overscrimmage pass was not overturned. They are certainly aware of that rate, and want to avoid padding that stat. I’m willing to bet that it is a goal of the ACC officiating crews to reduce the number (whatever the cost to the ppor league schools), and explains Tommy Hunt’s comments. It was close enough to try and explain away or deny. In a typical poor use of judgement (this statistic likely represents inherent deficiencies with the league officials) Hunt decides to use denial rather than accountability. Bet this approach jumps up to bite the league office in a national TV game soon.
If instant replay is not going to be used to determine if the game winning - last second touchdown was or was not scored, then lets dump the whole system to make the games shorter.
To answer other comments, I don’t beleive that it was reviewed because in every other situation the ref announces that the play is under review.
A few years ago I remember watching the ACC refs in person and on TV. I could see how bad they were. On TV the commentaors also pointed it out several times during the regular season. The coup de gras was when K. State was plaing in the Sugar Bowl and the ACC refs did such a bad job that it became a running joke by the guys calling the game.
Swofford came back the next year with some “accountability” rules for the refs and would jerk refs who blew calls. I think with Instant Replay Swofford now has dropped the ball on the ACC being attentive to some of the idiots who ref games and are not reprimanding them for bad games.
It seems that the powers that be in the ACC are once again are getting bogged down into the details and missing the whole point. No one is saying that we should use still pictures over video feeds as Hunt suggests in the N&O article.
The point is that NONE of the 3-4 “official� camera angles were in a position to have a clear shot of the play. The point is that we have NO camera angles along the goal line where the majority of the critical plays are going to occur.
I think that the majority of the fans realize that this is a new process that is going to have its growing pains. All the ACC office had to do was simply state that there is room for improvement with the system & that they are looking for ways to improve the process.
Hunt has taken the criticism personal & spent the last two days defending a process that has a flaw. Amateur still photo or not, the photo shows that there is a better angle for the goal line area.
Here is a crazy idea, instead of getting defensive about the issues…FIX the issues. Strike that…Hunt still works for the ACC office where they are more worried about saving face when problems surface than actually fixing the problems.
I’m sure Texas fans where saying a few years back that there is no way we should ever lose at home to NC State. A State team that went 6-6. It has been many a decade when any State team could say we should never lose at home to….
I’m sorry if you bought into the hype but I lost a lot of respect for Amato when I first walked in the Murphy Center lobby and saw many more/bigger pictures of him than Holtz and Rein and Sheriden. Excuse me but what have you done sir to deserve that? It seems to be all about him. I don’t see how you sell lifetime rights to a team that hasn’t accomplished anything. Seems to me that you win something first then go for the rights.
I’m not down on State football we have always been a good year 7-4 regular season team and bad year 4-7 team. I don’t expect us to be a 9-2, 8-3 team every year. I would like to see that once every three or four years as has always been the case. Hell- even MikO’Cain finished 9-3 once.
Instant replay is a rule and should be used IF it is a rule. We lost, and whats done is done. But if not going to use the rule…..lets selectively pick and choose which rules we want. I am not one whining to get a win - I just want them to use the rules consistently.
What about Stone’s 4th down run? Was it reviewed for the spot of the ball? I dont beleive anything Hahn says, but Evans is good wiht his analysis, and he said Stone made it. Now I think the play call stunk, but did he make it? Was it reviewed for spot? Evans can usually tell you within an inch or two before they bring the chains out, has a good eye. There was no indication this play was reviewed either.
Finally, 50% of the calls are not overturned. 50% of the game stoppage calls might be overturned. IF (emphasized IF) every call is reviewed, only a small percentage are actually overturned. If this were the NFL where the only replays are coaches challenges (or the final minutes), then the 50%factor might be relevant. But the fact that all calls are reviewed (supposedly) gives the zebras a little more support. Agreed though the ACC officials are awful, and every time Ron Cherry and his crew do a game, the natioanl announcers have a field day. Unfortunately, replay does not correct ineptitude for most calls.
Where are the unquestionable tapes that the replay official made his rock solid decision upon. I’m not trying to start anything, but I don’t think any camera’s were in place anywhere to make a good decision on. I think, bear with me here, maybe Swofford has sent out word that with gas prices the way they are, the camera guys and referees need to carpool, looks good anyway with the ACC doing it’s small part with global warming and all. Those camera guys were just sticking to a pre-determined schedule from their trip to C-F in which they all agreed, we’re getting the hell out of here before the traffic starts. They already had the AC on pumping full blast, music blaring, kicked back, and chillin’ in the (adaptly named, twice over) “Official” ACC Dodge mini-van with rich corinthian interior. Just sittin back and waitin’ on a detained herd of zebra’s to get the show on the road.
There is no film. No evidence to the contrary. Case closed. That’s my theory, anyway.
Is there absolute, incontrovertable proof that it WAS a Dodge???
If not, it MUST have been a Dodge.
On a slightly more serous note….instead of calling for Amato’s head, why aren’t we calling for Hunt or Swofford’s head??? The ACC should have hired a commisioner, and director of officials that DID NOT ATTEND OR GRADUATE FROM ANY ACC SCHOOL!!! Granted, it may have helped for expansion to have someone “from here” who genuinely cared about the money errr….the conference, but as far as being an unbiased leader for the ACC, we need someone who graduated from, like Cal-Poly San Luis Obispo, or Strayer University Online. Maybe if we had someone like that, we’d get some unbiased, fair decisions on and off the field.
NOW I’M OFF TO SEE ONE OF THOSE FANCY RUNNIN’ PITCHER SHOWS, YOU KNOW THEY MAKES ‘EM WITH SOUND AND ALL NOW.
The sad part about this is that as someone earlier said about Hunt “digging a hole and making it deeper” is that Chuck then jumps in the dang hole with him with his dumbass comments.
Must be them darned Non-Qualifier Referees making all these bad calls!
Now I think I understand why Chuck dropped the only course that I ever had with him when he was a graduate assistant after 1 or 2 classes. The professor teaching Comparative Economic Systems had a nasty habit of making you look like a dunce if you weren’t prepared for class. Chuck didn’t hang around for the fun to start!
Read this comment last year from none other than our own AD:
“Unlike the Big Ten model, however, every conference game - and perhaps - almost every game involving ACC schools - will use the new replay system. Even those games that won’t be televised will be equipped with replay capabilities, meaning every team in the league will get a fair shake, even those schools that may not appear on television as much.
“It will cost a little more to do it that way,” said NC State athletics director Lee Fowler. “But all of us are now using video boards now anyway. We’ll probably have to add a camera to make sure we have enough angles for a good replay.”
For the entire article see the following link:
http://www.theacc.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/061705aaa.html
Oh Lordy! I feel another fund raiser comming.
for2n8son Says:
“Oh Lordy! I feel another fund raiser comming.”
LOL Thank goodness the article was in June of 2005. You scared my wallet nearly to death.
Main point of the article that I was pointing out was about “camera angles”. I guess Fowler wouldn’t spring for the additional cameras on the goal line.
Take the cost out of Amato’s bowl game bonuses, maybe that will help with the replay problems AND deliver a message……..maybe not.
Why does it seem that everyone in a position of authority in the ACC is a UNC grad? Shouldn’t there be grads from other schools in positions of authority?