CLEMSON, SC — Clemson University is poised to spend up to $475,000 by June on legal counsel in its battle to leave the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC) without facing a hefty exit fine, records unveiled by The Post and Courier reveal. A spokesperson for the university affirmed that this financial burden will be shouldered by the athletic department’s income and private contributions, with no reliance on taxpayers’ dollars.
The financial stakes are high, as Clemson seeks a pathway out of the ACC that doesn’t involve coughing up the reported $140 million exit fee or sacrificing broadcast rights that could extend through 2036 owing to a deal with ESPN. This complex legal endeavor required Clemson, as a public entity, to gain clearance from the S.C. Attorney General’s Office before it could engage external legal teams.
Clemson has enlisted the expertise of three law firms for what has been described in authorization requests as “Very complex litigation of significant value.” These firms include Willson, Jones, Carter & Baxley in Greenville, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough in Columbia, and Boston’s Ropes & Gray. Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough stands to earn the highest fee, capped at $250,000 through the end of the fiscal year on June 30.
However, the resolution of Clemson’s legal confrontation with the ACC seems a distant prospect, with “alternative dispute resolution” scheduled only for October 2024. This implies that Clemson will have to reapply for approval to cover legal costs beyond July. In a boon for the university, negotiated rates have significantly lowered legal expenses, with top attorneys’ fees substantially reduced from their standard rates.
Clemson initated legal proceedings against the ACC in Pickens County on March 19, which was quickly followed by a countersuit by the ACC in Mecklenburg County, N.C., the next day. In an expanded complaint on April 17, Clemson accused the ACC of misleading narratives around its broadcast rights agreement, demanding the conference pay the legal bills.
A recent court decision forced the ACC to share its ESPN contract details with Clemson’s legal team. The ongoing litigation underscores Clemson’s challenge against a clause that the ACC claims entitles it to broadcast rights irrespective of a member school’s continued membership.
This legal battle is partly motivated by financial disparities between ACC institutions and those in the “Power 2” conferences — the Big Ten and SEC. Last year, the disparity in broadcast revenue between ACC schools and their Big Ten and SEC counterparts amounted to around $20 million and $10 million, respectively. With this legal challenge, Clemson, alongside Florida State, aims to narrow this revenue gap and explore new conference affiliations.