Q & A with Clemson University president James Barker

James Barker has taken an active role in Clemson athletics since becoming the school's president in 1999. Barker, a former pole vaulter for the Tigers, recently dealt with a severe backlash from fans after the school's Athletic Admissions Review Committee (AARC) barred football coaches from signing two recruits. Barker recently sat down for a lengthy discussion with The Post and Courier's Larry Williams.

One of your most prominent goals is bringing the university and athletic department together, the "One Clemson" concept. Where do you think things stand in that regard?

"This is not a new idea. Almost eight years ago, when I was interviewing for this position, they were asking me what I thought this university could be. I outlined a few goals, and one of them was to set our athletic goals along with our academic goals. They were interested in why I would put the two together, and I said at Clemson we have to see ourselves whole, with the idea of athletics and academics working together. That's part of our DNA. ... 'One Clemson' is a lot easier to say than it is to do. It's a challenge every day. It's a challenge that our faculty recognize that there's another part of the university, and our coaches recognize there's another part of the university."

Was the recent flare-up involving AARC a step back in that regard?

"I think it was a step forward, honestly. I think it was a step back for a minute, because we had to say, 'OK, that's a nice bumper sticker that says One Clemson, but we have to put it to the test.' ... Our faculty is more aware of the issues, and our coaches are more aware of the issues. There's communication at levels that has never happened before. ... Overall, we are stronger now as a result."

There's a feeling by some and perhaps many in the academic community that Clemson compromised its academic integrity when it revised its admissions process for borderline athletes. What was your reaction to the university panel of faculty and administrators that objected to changes?

"We put together the right task force to take a look at this. No one understands Clemson better than our provost, Dori Helms, and our athletic director, Terry Don Phillips. There was a balanced makeup that was the right makeup (on the presidential task force), because coaches were the ones that were out on the recruiting trail. So they knew the ins and outs of what that's like. And that's not an easy thing for faculty to understand, nor is it an easy thing for coaches to understand what it's like when you have a student-athlete in the classroom. ... We have a lot of different voices at Clemson, and my job is to listen to all of them. But there were a lot of voices speaking at that time, and I needed our best thinkers to come together."

Have the NCAA and ACC approved the revised admissions standards for athletes?

"They're aware of it. We really haven't asked for their endorsement. All we really had to do was say, 'We've done this.' "

Clemson's academic standards are rising across the board. The athletic department's answer to this seems to be pouring more money into Vickery Hall, the academic-support center for athletes. Is this response sufficient?

"No. I think we've got to change how we recruit and who we recruit. We're going to have to go after student-athletes who can compete in this environment. We can't rely solely on Vickery Hall. We have to do both. We have to strengthen Vickery Hall, but we also have to go after those student-athletes who have a chance to be successful at Clemson. And I think we've done very well on that. But it's becoming a much more competitive environment than it's ever been. We are competing with schools that are great institutions that want those same student-athletes."

Colleges used to brag about low graduation rates. Nowadays, Clemson and other schools waste no opportunity to tout high graduation rates, particularly involving athletics. Are you satisfied with the academic rigor for your athletes?

"Absolutely. It is the same rigor as the students have, no doubt about that. We work very carefully with Vickery Hall, the tutors that are there ... You don't go to professors at Clemson and say we're going to dumb down these courses. ... The rigor is going to continue to go up at Clemson. That's why Vickery Hall and recruiting student-athletes becomes more and more of a challenge."

Is this the biggest challenge facing Clemson athletics in the next five to 10 years, given the reduction of electives and the elimination of majors that have been heavily populated by athletes?

"I think it would be among the top two or three. I would say that would be right up there with making sure we have great coaches and great leadership in athletics. The university is going to move forward, and athletics has to be a part of that. We haven't gone from 74th to 30 in terms of our national ranking in the U.S. News and World Report without athletics being a part of that."

Is it ironic to you that, for all the discontent about the previous athletic admissions standards, football coach Tommy Bowden has managed to put together his best three recruiting classes in the past three years?

"I think that's true. The work of the AARC may have been more helpful than some people realize. It works. I think academic reform is having its impact. ... There are those who would say that you can't do it both ways, that you can't have your best recruiting classes with higher admissions standards. We just don't buy that here. We believe it's possible to do both and that's what we expect."

How disappointing was last year's football season for you, given the 1-4 finish after the 7-1 start?

"I have learned after several seasons to not set my own expectations. I'm a very competitive person, and I want us to win every single football game. It's no fun in the president's box when the crowd leaves and I have to thank everybody for coming if we've not played well. ... I don't think anybody was happy about it, but I also try to look at the long view of how coach Bowden and his staff have done in all aspects. I try to look at the long term, I try to look at things outside of just what happens on the football field — the student-athletes we're recruiting. Are we graduating? What kind of people are they? We're doing much better in all those areas; we're doing well. But I have a goal of winning a national championship in football, and coach Bowden embraces that goal. I'll be evaluated by the trustees on all those goals. And although we've gone to several Final Fours in soccer and women's tennis, we haven't gotten our basketball Final Fours yet. So we've got a ways to go."

Bowden is entering his ninth year and has yet to win an ACC title. How much leeway do you give him, considering that facilities upgrades he expected upon his hiring did not come to fruition until recently?

"I think you've got to look at the overall picture of that. He was very keen in my first year about the facilities side of things. And I believe I was a typical Clemson person, in a sense that I didn't have a realistic view of what our facilities were like. I was living with 15, 18 years ago, when we had the best facilities in the conference. I wasn't looking at the new ACC. I wasn't looking at the changes that happened during that time. My conversations with him helped me see where we actually stood. ... I do not think it's coincidence that our best recruiting classes have come since our facilities have been improved."

You've recently been selected to chair the NCAA Board of Directors. Any particular goals you have in mind?

"I would say the momentum for academic reform. I would also like to see us demystify the NCAA. It is an organization capable of doing great things and humane things, as evidenced by the Ray Ray McElrathbey decision. It is also possible for it to go to the side of becoming a very complex organization that you can't really get your hands around."

Did it bother you that there was so little clarity from the NCAA after its recent decision to award a baseball super regional to Mississippi State over Clemson?

"I think that's when you realize that baseball playoffs need to get the clarity that the basketball playoffs have and other sports playoffs have. There's clearly a trend in that direction. But when a certain set of dominoes fall a certain way, it looked to me that there wasn't that clarity you have in other sports. I think the NCAA can do better than that."

What's your view of a playoff in college football?

"I really am open to thinking about lots of alternatives in that regard. But I do not sense a desire to extend the season in football among university presidents. I think the idea of rewarding teams with bowls, the importance of each game in the season, as opposed to just getting to the playoffs — I don't see that there's going to be much change anytime soon."

Did the NCAA kill its credibility on the playoff issue by allowing 12 regular season games in college football? The professed reason presidents are opposed to a playoff is the prospect of too many games.

"Absolutely. I think that was a mistake. The ACC voted against it. Clemson strongly held that it was not a good idea. The chance of injury to student-athletes, all those kind of things. Saying one thing and doing another, there's an element of hypocrisy to it."

What's your opinion on the coming changes in the football season-ticket policy? Does Clemson just say "tough luck" to the loyal, grassroots fans who have contributed at minimum levels for decades?

"I think we have a challenge in front of us with how tickets will be sold and what priority they will be. I think there's always been that challenge. So there's nothing new in that regard. But the way we've gotten through it is we've had good communication. ... I don't think it will be simple, because we do need to reward loyalty as much as we reward donations. But we cannot just go on loyalty in the environment we're in. It has to be based to a certain extent on support that people have provided. The folks I'm concerned about are folks that don't have the financial capacity to increase. A lot of people claim that, but I'm talking about those folks that are retired and are living on certain kind of budgets. We need to look carefully at that, and I'm confident we will."

What was your reaction to the revelation that several women's track athletes had abortions for fear of losing scholarship money?

"I was concerned about that. I was concerned about it from a lot of different standpoints. I was concerned from the standpoint of the humane quality about losing scholarships for that — that's not something we should do. And there's no evidence that we did. But to have made a statement, almost a kind of threat, in the student handbook, was a mistake. On the other hand, I think it's a mistake for our student-athletes to think (abortion) is OK. We ought to be very clear, not with threats, but about how they live their life. That's not something Clemson should encourage or should have a place for that to happen. But to make a threat is not the right approach, either. I think going forward we're better prepared for that kind of question as it comes up."

Having been through one Clemson-South Carolina game on Thanksgiving weekend, what's your take?

"I really think that if we had to choose that, we would not have chosen that. It was the 12th game that put us in that spot. I think Thanksgiving is better spent with families without having to try to work in a football game as important as that one is into that holiday weekend. I am hopefully wise enough to realize that this could become the holiday tradition for South Carolina.

Reach Larry Williams at lwilliams@postandcourier.com.