This is one of the most complicated legal deals I’ve ever seen. Honestly. It reminds me of a case I had years ago in Wake County that centered on an IP/contract license dispute. In fairness, that contract was slightly longer than this one, but no less convoluted. I moved for

Loving how Clemson and FSU seem to have dropped these agreements on the press the day before a major holiday . I am guessing that they came at the same time too. But how is this (exhibit from the SA) for transparency from public schools:

And by this I mean that FSU and Clemson can raise all their obnoxious sovereign immunity arguments to undo this very deal. You know, all their State/King "can do no wrong" idiotic arguments that have no bearing on a contract that grown adults signed and took millions under.

This is, by far, the most bewildering aspect of this Settlement Agreement. It highlights both the ACC’s stupidity and Clemson and FSU’s superior bargaining leverage: the ACC didn't get a waiver of sovereign immunity. So, let's all go back to square one. I am sure that.

Combined with the main Settlement Agreement, the changes to the ACC Constitution gives Clemson/FSU veto over:. * Any changes to these voting rules themselves, as Clemson and FSU have permanent veto power over removing their veto power.* Revenue distribution changes.* Withdrawal.

The Settlement Agreement shows a masterpiece of negotiating leverage-- Clemson has essentially obtained the benefits of conference membership with the control of independence. Hard to believe that all ACC schools agreed to this. How in the world did this make sense to Wake and.

Sections 1.7-1.8 effectively nullify the Grant of Rights that has been the ACC's primary retention mechanism. Upon payment of the withdrawal fee and proper notice, Clemson immediately regains "exclusive basis all media rights”— that’s a complete reversal of typical conference or

Five hours into this (and still not done), but here is how I would describe Clemson and FSU's new position: . 👉If they stay: They control their destiny.👉If they leave: They prevented unfavorable changes before departure.👉Either way: They've maximized their position. Total win.

I am still working on this, but there is now essentially tiered membership in the ACC in terms of governance and revenue distribution. There is Clemson and FSU, and then everyone else in terms of governance. There is Clemson, FSU, Miami, and UNC, and then everyone else in terms.

And in looking at the changes to the ACC Constitution, Clemson/FSU's veto/blockade powers mirror those in the Settlement Agreement. Clemson/FSU can block actions even if 17 other schools vote yes. The provision that Section 1.6.2.1 "may not be amended or modified without the

I read this as effectively giving Clemson special governance rights that other members may not have, including: protection against changes that could trap Clemson financially or procedurally; ability to block modifications to withdrawal payment calculations; and control over

Go Tigers. Clemson sure won on this one. I say this as a Clemson native-- DWD '92.

Boys and girls, how much did NC State spend on evaluating the Grant of Rights agreement and conference realignment? (I know the actual number.).

That fundamentally misunderstands both the law and the issue. First, these aren't private contracts-- they're compensation arrangements funded directly or indirectly by taxpayer money through public universities. Second, existing public records law already protects genuine.

“If you don’t like sharing information with the public,” McKenzie said, “don’t take the public’s money.”. Read more at: