WTF is with this thread? I understand school pride and conference pride, but eyes wide open people. The ACC has been pretty slimy and so has ESPN. I have little doubt that they don't want the details coming out. These people have reputations and move about in rarified society. There is some ugliness there, and denying it is simply willful blindness.
As for the whole Louisville vs Rutgers vs Maryland thing, use your brains. The B1G wasn't looking for athletic success. It got that the last two times wth Penn State and Nebraska. This time it needed markets, since some of its markets (cough: Detroit) are becoming virtual wastelands. Thanks to a government with idiocy on steroids, DC is flush with people and money. New Jersey ties up Philly when combined with Penn State, and gets a toe in the water in NYC. Rutgers always looked like a Big Ten school, it just never played like one. Maryland is mid-pack, they are Iowa athletically, with a much better market. Both choices retained the B1Gs academic and geographic requirements. On field performance is much easier to change than location, reputation, size and academics.
Since the ACC had a differnet problem, weak recent performances on field, they wanted on field performance and brand value. To get it, they compromised their academic reputation and geographic logic, and took Louisville. Short term, it was the right move...long term, it will haunt them. With UConn they would have the same on-court basketball performance, or better, and weaker football, but they would make no geographic or academic compromises. In fact, given that they had just lost a school in the largest market in the conference, you might think they would want to capture a school in a larger market. Instead they went to nowhereville. If Louisville football declines without Strong, and Diaco brings UConn up, how does that decision look? Mind bogglingly stupid, that's how. Considering the ACC rejected WVU on academics, it looks even worse. WVU would be a much better choice than Louisville in every way. Unless you get a long-time stud, like Nebraska or Penn State (or UConn & Louisville basketball), you do not consider short term on-field success in choosing teams. It is meaningless.
My guess is that if the ACC presidents knew that FSU would win a title, that Duke would actually be good, and that UNC would show signs of becoming a player in football (scandals aside), they wouldn't take Louisville. It was a reactionary move with no long term thought involved.