ShareThis Page

ACC bracing for NCAA rules changes involving coaches and athletes

| Sunday, July 20, 2014, 7:09 p.m.
Pitt's Ray Vinopal answers a question during a news conference at ACC media days Sunday, July 20, 2014, in Greensboro, N.C.

GREENSBORO, N.C. — ACC commissioner John Swofford wasn't pointing an accusing finger at his conference's coaches when he said a significant NCAA rule implemented to protect athletes is broken routinely.

No one was surprised when he said during his opening statement Sunday at ACC media days:

“The 20-hour rule is being abused. We know that.”

That's the limitation imposed by the NCAA that prohibits coaches from interacting with players more than 20 hours in any week during the season or designated training periods, such as spring football or fall baseball. It includes one day off per week.

Actually, Pitt senior safety Ray Vinopal said 20 hours aren't enough. He said he has worked 30 hours in a week, and plans to do more this season.

“I want to basically live at the (training) facility,” he said.

It should be noted that the extra time is allowable if it's done without coaches.

“We abide by the 20 hours,” Vinopal said. “A lot of guys do their own preparation. I don't feel 20 is enough for me personally to have the level of preparation I would like to have going into the game.

“Aaron Donald (former Pitt All-American), the amount of time he put in was unreal. He did it like a pro.”

The 20-hour rule is just one of a myriad of NCAA regulations that could be altered — in this case expanded — if the so-called Power 5 conferences (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC) are granted autonomy by the Division I Board of Directors. A vote is scheduled Aug. 7, and Swofford said he expects autonomy to be granted.

“I will be surprised if it doesn't pass,” Swofford said.

Swofford said the autonomy issue was raised by conference and school officials before Northwestern student-athletes proposed to unionize.

“The average fan may look at this and say it is a knee-jerk reaction to the Northwestern situation,” he said. “It is not. The whole effort to restructure and give autonomy to those schools that have financial resources to address those issues started long before Northwestern.

“Autonomy opens up some opportunities for the five conferences to do some things we feel are important.”

That could include, he said, scholarships granted for all four years (presently most are year-to-year propositions). He admitted, however, that officials in all five conferences have yet to come to a consensus on that issue.

But student-athletes could end up with more money in their pockets through a full cost-of-attendance stipend and voting privileges. The proposal would make 15 students part of an 80-person council that includes the 64 Power 5 schools, plus Notre Dame.

“I think it's time for our student-athletes to have a voice at the national level,” Swofford said.

The proposal, however, could set up a division between the richer, more powerful schools and others that are less successful.

In fact, SMU coach June Jones suggested the non-Power 5 conferences should play a spring schedule to avoid direct competition with the bigger schools. But commissioners of the American Athletic Conference, Mountain West and Mid-American said they have no interest in even considering such a radical plan, ESPN reported. It appears there is no avoiding autonomy.

“The good ship status quo has sailed, and it's time for some changes,” Swofford said.

Jerry DiPaola is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. Reach him at or via Twitter @JDiPaola­_Trib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.