University of Virginia Library

The 800 Rule

This week the college presidents of the
eight Atlantic Coast Conference schools will
meet to try to solve a problem which may
result in two of its members leaving the
conference. The problem is a resolution
introduced by South Carolina which would
change the ACC's academic guidelines to
allow member schools to have athletes with
combined College Board totals of less than
800.

The proposal was previously sponsored by
South Carolina, Maryland, N.C. State and
Clemson, and it suggests that the ACC replace
the 800 rule with the NCAA guideline which
requires that prospective athletes have a
projected grade-point average of 1.6. It
appears that unless the ACC changes its
academic rules, South Carolina and Clemson
will leave the conference, reducing the
number of teams in the ACC from eight to
six.

The ACC has always been a weak
conference when compared to the
Southeastern Conference, or the northern
independent football powers. Schools such as
South Carolina and Clemson are tired of
losing to Southeastern Conference teams, and
they think that the adoption of the 1.6 rule
will allow them to recruit better athletes

No doubt ACC teams have lost many a
good football player to other conferences
because of academic requirements. Even
within the conference schools have lost good
players to other member schools with less
strict academic policies. The most noteworthy
example of the latter phenomenon being
Virginia's loss of All-America Don McCauley to
North Carolina.

South Carolina, Clemson, Maryland, and
N.C. State are engaged in building large-scale
athletic programs, and with the proposed rule
change they are trying to take the other
member ACC teams down the road of
big-time football, too.

The 800 rule isn't entirely a fair rule, but
it is a better rule than the 1.6 guideline. The
800 rule provides an absolute standard while
the 1.6 rule does not. Conceivably it may be
easier for an athlete to actually earn a 1.6
grade-point average or better at a school with
a lesser academic reputation than at a school
with a better reputation, especially if a school
chose to offer "special" courses to its
athletes. Several years ago when the NCAA
adopted the 1.6 rule, the Ivy League criticized
the rule on those same grounds, complaining
that it is harder for an Ivy League student to
earn a 1.6 than it is for a student in a large
state university. In order to maintain its
academic standards the vies found
themselves unable to compete outside their
league, and consequently they play each
other.

Obviously South Carolina, Clemson,
Maryland and N.C. State believe that students
with college board scores of under 800 will be
able to earn 1.6 averages at their respective
institutions. If board scores are indicative of
college performance, it is hard to imagine that
students with scores under 800 would be able
to earn the required GPA at a school like
Virginia with an SAT mean of about 1200, or
at schools such as Duke o UNC which have
similar high standards. So if the rule were
adopted, these schools would be in an unfair
position.

As it is, these schools are in a difficult
position, because they have to recruit athletes
who are also able to succeed academically at
schools where the academic competition is
more demanding. But even with this obstacle
to overcome. Duke and UNC both produced
football teams which finished ahead of the
1.6 supporters in the ACC standings.

It is possible to produce fine football
teams whose members are both fine athletes
and good students. This has been proven by
schools such as Duke, UNC. Dartmouth, and
Yale, which this year won the Lambert
Trophy which signifies the best team in the
East. Virginia can be proud that it placed five
members on the 1970 ACC academic team.
One does not necessarily have to be dumb to
be a good football player.

The adoption of the 1.6 rule would enlarge
the number of possible football recruits for
schools like USC, Maryland, N.C. State, and
Clemson. Under present standards it is
doubtful that the football-player market
would be increased very much for Virginia. As
it is, Virginia has not had great success in the
conference, and if the 1.6 rule is adopted, it
will probably have even less success.

South Carolina and Clemson may leave the
conference unless the rule is changed. But
there are several schools waiting to replace
them, notably Virginia Tech. The loss of USC
and Clemson would probably not be that
much of a loss. However, if the rule is
changed, in several years schools such as
Virginia. Duke and UNC may be forced to
either leave the conference or embark upon a
large scale big-time football program. If that
decision comes we urge the University to
leave the ACC and play Ivy League teams and
other teams more in its league.

This week we urge the University to vote
against the adoption of the 1.6 rule.