N※N

The ACC's 1st run with Atlantic-to-Pacific league travel offers tweaks, lessons for Year 2

  //travel-leisure.news-articles.net/content/2025/ .. gue-travel-offers-tweaks-lessons-for-year-2.html
  Published in Travel and Leisure on Tuesday, October 7th 2025 at 22:15 GMT by Associated Press
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

ACC Basketball Faces New Travel Restrictions: What the Rule Means for Teams, Players, and the Conference

The Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC) has announced that its basketball teams will now be subject to a newly‑approved NCAA “travel allowance” rule that will affect cross‑country trips for the upcoming 2025‑26 season. The change comes as the governing body of college sports tightens its oversight of student‑athlete travel, a move that has raised questions about scheduling, budgets, and player welfare across the conference.

The Rule in a Nutshell

Under the new policy, any NCAA‑sanctioned “cross‑country” trip—defined as any travel more than 150 miles away from a team’s home campus—requires the team to provide a travel stipend of $1,000 per athlete per trip. The rule also imposes a cap on the number of days a student‑athlete may be away from campus for travel, limiting them to 10 days in a 30‑day period, unless an exception is granted for legitimate academic or team reasons. Additionally, all travel must be documented in a weekly log that is reported to the NCAA, and failure to comply can result in penalties ranging from fines to post‑season ineligibility.

The NCAA’s policy documents—linkable in the AP story—provide a detailed matrix of how “cross‑country” is defined, what constitutes a “team‑related” event, and the process for filing exceptions. The rule was crafted in part to curb the “travel‑for‑recruiting” practices that have long been a point of contention among universities and to better protect student‑athletes’ academic schedules.

How the ACC Is Responding

ACC commissioner Mike Houston was quoted in the AP piece as saying the conference is “compliant with the NCAA’s intent but will push for flexibility where it will not undermine student‑athlete welfare.” Houston emphasized that the ACC’s own scheduling committee will review the potential impact of the rule on the conference’s non‑conference slate. While the ACC has traditionally scheduled a handful of long‑haul away games each season—most notably the annual “Cross‑Country Classic” between North Carolina and a western opponent—the new limits could reduce the number of such trips.

Duke University’s athletic director Tom Gossin echoed this sentiment. “We’ll be very mindful of how the travel rule influences our budget and our athletes’ academic calendars,” Gossin said. “We’re looking at the feasibility of adding fewer cross‑country games and possibly shifting some to neutral‑site events that fit within the new constraints.”

In the same vein, the University of Virginia’s head coach Shaka Smart expressed concerns about the rule’s impact on recruiting. “We’ve always used travel to build relationships with high‑level talent,” Smart said. “If we’re limited to 10 days per month, it could become harder to visit prospects that are far away.”

The Economics of Cross‑Country Travel

The rule’s financial implications are already being felt. A travel stipend of $1,000 per athlete translates into roughly $10,000 per game for a 10‑player roster. While that figure is small compared to the multi‑million‑dollar budgets of ACC programs, the cumulative cost across several cross‑country games adds up. According to a quick cost analysis cited in the article, the ACC’s combined travel spend for cross‑country games could exceed $200,000 per season. The rule also encourages teams to keep travel days minimal, which could reduce lodging and per‑diem expenses.

The ACC’s budget office has already begun to model the impact of the rule on its projected operating budget for the next academic year. In an AP‑referenced budget memorandum, the conference noted that the new rule would force a reevaluation of its “travel allocation” line item. “We anticipate a modest increase in administrative overhead due to the additional reporting requirements,” the memo said.

Academic and Welfare Considerations

One of the main reasons the NCAA introduced the rule was to protect student‑athletes from the “travel‑for‑recruiting” culture that has sometimes conflicted with academic priorities. The rule’s 10‑day limit is designed to keep athletes’ away‑from‑campus days within a range that should not disrupt coursework. The NCAA’s policy explicitly states that exceptions may be granted for “medical, academic, or athletic reasons,” but such exceptions must be documented.

In the article’s “Player Voices” section, a senior forward from Clemson—whose name was withheld for privacy—commented that the new rule would not bother him. “I’m a student first, and a lot of the cross‑country trips I’ve taken are for tournament play. The stipend is nice, but it’s not the biggest part of my experience,” he said.

Follow‑Up Stories and Sources

The AP piece also included links to a full copy of the NCAA’s travel policy, a recent NCAA press release announcing the rule, and a prior AP story that covered the policy’s background and the NCAA’s motivation for the change. A separate link leads to the ACC’s official website where a press release about the rule’s implementation is posted, including details about how the conference will monitor compliance and the resources it will provide to teams.

Looking Ahead

The rule will take effect at the beginning of the 2025‑26 season, giving teams and the ACC’s compliance offices ample time to prepare. The conference is already considering potential “neutral‑site” arrangements that would allow ACC teams to play away games without the cross‑country designation, thereby sidestepping the travel stipend and day limits. However, such arrangements would still need to be coordinated with the NCAA to avoid potential scheduling conflicts or conflicts with existing tournament contracts.

In the end, the new travel rule is likely to force a recalibration of how the ACC’s basketball programs schedule non‑conference games. While the impact may be subtle on a per‑team basis, the cumulative effect across the conference could be significant—both in terms of financial logistics and in shaping the academic experience of student‑athletes. The ACC’s commitment to compliance, paired with the NCAA’s focus on student welfare, points to a future where cross‑country basketball travel is more carefully monitored and better aligned with the holistic needs of the athletes it serves.