Clemson files lawsuit against ACC over 'exorbitant' exit fees

NT80 · March 19

More Potential conference movement, which along with the MWC/PAC2 situation, could impact AAC membership in the future...

"In a significant move that could continue to alter the rapidly shifting landscape of college sports, Clemson filed a lawsuit against the ACC on Tuesday that portends its exit from the league."

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/39765481/clemson-files-lawsuit-acc-exorbitant-exit-fees

NorthTexan95 · March 19

"We no longer like the contact we signed so please give us a do over."

MCMLXXX · March 19

The pleadings,

https://publicindex.sccourts.org/Pickens/PublicIndex/PIImageDisplay.aspx?ctagency=39002&doctype=D&docid=1710857683689-904&HKey=667489107117108103658848118665252837911910412012298107118835370551161098567100474889668984741061204977

El Paso Eagle · March 19

I've been searching for articles about when Clemson and Florida State were forced to sign the agreements to be in the ACC and get information on the lawsuits they filed, trying not to take the money.

TheColonyEagle · March 20

I think I could've been a judge:

"Clemson, when you signed this contract...were these exit fees in there?"

"yes"

"and you signed the contract anyway?"

"yes"

"ok lawsuit dismissed"

The trial would take about 4 minutes. I saved everyone a bunch of time and money. Lawyers have to get 2nd jobs, the jury gets to be back at their jobs after lunch....

TheColonyEagle · March 20

Just now, TheColonyEagle said:

I think I could've been a judge:

"Clemson, when you signed this contract...were these exit fees in there?"

"yes"

"and you signed the contract anyway?"

"yes"

"ok lawsuit dismissed"

The trial would take about 4 minutes. I saved everyone a bunch of time and money. Lawyers have to get 2nd jobs, the jury gets to be back at their jobs after lunch....

Oh...and for good measure, if we want to extend the trial another 3 minutes:

"Clemson, did you get the money the ACC committed to you per the terms of the contract between you and the ACC?"

"yes"

"OK then case super duper dismissed and you're being fined $5.25 for wasting the court's time"

rcade · March 20

The four-page grant of rights is going to fail. It isn't going to lock schools into a TV revenue death spiral with the ACC.

Every football power that has wanted to leave a conference has ended up getting out. These lawsuits will be settled with the schools agreeing to an exit price they can live with.

The ACC adding SMU, Stanford and Cal is one of several moves where the conference helped itself at the expense of its top football schools. It brought the ACC's per-school TV revenue down, increasing the gap between the ACC and the Power Two.

MrAlien · March 20

Clemson and FSU have an argument, they are essentially carrying this conference. But I think the message it sends to the rest of the conference is that they can do this the easy way or the hard way. Both schools have the means to leave if they really want to, but this can get nasty and have a drastic financial impact on the remaining programs.

Mean Green 93-98 · March 20

5 hours ago, TheColonyEagle said:

I think I could've been a judge:

"Clemson, when you signed this contract...were these exit fees in there?"

"yes"

"and you signed the contract anyway?"

"yes"

"Was SMU in the conference at the time, depreciating the ACC from a quality P5 program into a laughingstock/craphole?"

"No."

"It would be cruel and unusual punishment to force you to be in this situation. You are free to go with no exit fees, and SMU's donors will be required to pay your legal fees as well as to repay your emotional distress."

Edited March 20 by Mean Green 93-98

TheColonyEagle · March 20

44 minutes ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

"Was SMU in the conference at the time, depreciating the AAC from a quality P5 program into a laughingstock/craphole?"

"No."

"It would be cruel and unusual punishment to force you to be in this situation. You are free to go with no exit fees, and SMU's donors will be required to pay your legal fees as well as to repay your emotional distress."

jim halpert GIF

NT80 · March 21

7 hours ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

"Was SMU in the conference at the time, depreciating the ACC from a quality P5 program into a laughingstock/craphole?"

"No."

"It would be cruel and unusual punishment to force you to be in this situation. You are free to go with no exit fees, and SMU's donors will be required to pay your legal fees as well as to repay your emotional distress."

Yes, it's no coincidence that these lawsuits by FSU and Clemson to get out of the ACC were filed after $mut was admitted into the ACC.

UNTLifer · March 21

So, how about that Mean Green football?

greenminer · March 21

CLEMSON: "these exit fees are too much!"

ACC: "they were on the contract when you signed the dotted line."

CLEMSON: "but this isn't the same conference we signed up for!"

*NEXT CONFERENCE* "So, here are our exit fees. Are you okay with them, or are we supposed to account for future realignments for you?"

NT80 · March 21

1 hour ago, greenminer said:

CLEMSON: "these exit fees are too much!"

ACC: "they were on the contract when you signed the dotted line."

CLEMSON: "but this isn't the same conference we signed up for!"

*NEXT CONFERENCE* "So, here are our exit fees. Are you okay with them, or are we supposed to account for future realignments for you?"

I believe both FSU and Clemson have a pending verbal deal waiting (SEC/BIG10) for when they escape the ACC. Otherwise they wouldn't be paying lawyers to file suit. There will be a mutually acceptable agreement that will allow them out since the ACC already has their replacement$.

MrAlien · March 21

I think its safe to say they will both be in the SEC, and that deal would be way more lucrative then what they are earning in the ACC, and ultimately worth the exit fee. The ACC media deal becomes an option for ESPN after 2027, and with out the heavy weights, ESPN may not want to pick up that deal.

outoftown · March 21

1 hour ago, MrAlien said:

I think its safe to say they will both be in the SEC, and that deal would be way more lucrative then what they are earning in the ACC, and ultimately worth the exit fee. The ACC media deal becomes an option for ESPN after 2027, and with out the heavy weights, ESPN may not want to pick up that deal.

Maybe. But ESPN turning down that deal after shepparding top schools to another conference it owns will open it up to collusion suits it might have a pretty hard time to defend. The having to open records for fact finding alone might be scary. I have a feeling ESPN might be willing to let them hang out to dry for a bit.

rcade · March 21

14 hours ago, greenminer said:

*NEXT CONFERENCE* "So, here are our exit fees. Are you okay with them, or are we supposed to account for future realignments for you?"

The conferences FSU and Clemson would go to don't use a grant of rights to lock schools in. They don't have to because it would be crazy to leave all the money behind.

The SEC only costs $30 million to quit, which makes the ACC shooting for $500 million pretty funny. SMU fans must be telling themselves that if they end up in a PAC-2 scenario, at least their two-member conference will have $6.5 billion dollars.

Edited March 21 by rcade

rcade · March 21

2 hours ago, MrAlien said:

I think its safe to say they will both be in the SEC, and that deal would be way more lucrative then what they are earning in the ACC, and ultimately worth the exit fee. The ACC media deal becomes an option for ESPN after 2027, and with out the heavy weights, ESPN may not want to pick up that deal.

There's talk that the SEC doesn't want them because of what it already has in Florida and South Carolina.

MrAlien · March 21

1 hour ago, outoftown said:

Maybe. But ESPN turning down that deal after shepparding top schools to another conference it owns will open it up to collusion suits it might have a pretty hard time to defend. The having to open records for fact finding alone might be scary. I have a feeling ESPN might be willing to let them hang out to dry for a bit.

true, there will be multiple suits, but once the 2 super conferences are set there will be no going back. It will not matter what they have to pay in legal fees and penalties, being in the top conference will be worth it.

keith · March 21

When the ACC took in Cal, Stanford and SMU wasn't that a signal that they had resigned themselves to the fact that they would have to negotiate and accept an early exit for Clemson and Florida St?

Jonnyeagle · March 21

12 minutes ago, keith said:

When the ACC took in Cal, Stanford and SMU wasn't that a signal that they had resigned themselves to the fact that they would have to negotiate and accept an early exit for Clemson and Florida St?

That was my read as well.

Mean Green 93-98 · March 21

12 minutes ago, keith said:

When the ACC took in Cal, Stanford and SMU wasn't that a signal that they had resigned themselves to the fact that they would have to negotiate and accept an early exit for Clemson and Florida St?

Exactly. Otherwise they never would have gotten in, even with SMU's substantial bribe.

NT80 · March 21

12 minutes ago, keith said:

When the ACC took in Cal, Stanford and SMU wasn't that a signal that they had resigned themselves to the fact that they would have to negotiate and accept an early exit for Clemson and Florida St?

Yes. Several schools (7) were exploring exit strategy from the ACC when the SEC and Big10 were in full expansion mode. The ACC didn't want a PAC12 situation. The invites were insurance in case 2-3 schools left the conference that it would remain whole.

MrAlien · March 21

I have a feeling this could turn into another Pac12 debacle... Notre Dame might decide they would rather not be left out of a super conference and join the Big10. The Big12 will emerge as the next best thing to the Super conferences, and will probably attract interest from Virginia and Georgia Tech. At which point Cal and Stanford might decide its not worth it to remain in the ACC, and try and build something out of the old Pac12 along with the MWC.

southsideguy · March 23

Coaches dont follow their contracts unless they benefit from it, players change schools like most change underwear why should conferences be any different. It is the Wild Wild West now. I hear they want out because SMU is joining the conference.