Single Post

After 14 months of litigation, hundreds of pages of legal filings and millions of dollars in legal fees, the ACC’s legal infighting has effectively ended. The conference and two of its marquee members, Florida State and Clemson, are finalizing the end to their dueling lawsuits against each other.

So what did all of this accomplish? And what’s next?

Now that the terms of the settlement have become public, here are some final thoughts — including winners and losers — on one of the bumpiest patches in ACC history:

What was all of this about, again?

Two things. The main argument was about the ownership of hundreds of millions of dollars in future TV rights if a school left the ACC. Would they belong to the conference through the end of the league’s TV contract in 2036 (as the ACC claimed)? Or the schools (as Florida State and Clemson argued)?

The other disagreement was about a fee to leave the league. The schools contended the exit fee — which had swelled to $165 million — was “unconscionable” and shouldn’t be enforced.

Did we get any answers?

Legally, no. At least five appeals bogged down the cases. Because of the glacial pace, the sides were still arguing about which courts they’d argue in. There were no significant rulings on the actual issues or the millions of dollars in dispute.

But practically, yes. The total cost to a school for leaving the ACC is $165 million in the 2026 fiscal year and drops annually, according to terms presented to Clemson trustees. It levels out around $75 million in 2030-31. Departing schools also get to keep their TV rights.

Who are some of the winners and losers?

Let’s go through them:

Florida State and Clemson: Winners

The Seminoles were more outspoken about their unhappiness with the league’s revenue, which lagged behind their peers from the SEC and Big Ten. In August 2023, current trustee and former FSU quarterback Drew Weatherford said it was a matter of how and when Florida State would leave the ACC “unless something drastic changes.”

“The good news is,” Weatherford said Tuesday, “that things have drastically changed since we had that conversation — for our benefit.”

Instead of facing a $30 million annual gap through 2036, the difference could be closer to, say, $15 million through 2031. That’s because the ACC’s new revenue-distribution model rewards teams that have the most success and attract the most viewers in football and basketball. The Seminoles and Tigers — who have combined to win 13 of the ACC’s past 14 football championships — should benefit.

The league’s new exit terms also help. Clemson and Florida State have a clear, financially viable path to leave if the Big Ten wanted to add them in 2031, or if the SEC expands in 2034, or if some super league scenario shakes out before 2036.

The ACC: TBD

The ACC is a winner in that it’s still together. That was no guarantee when the litigation began 14 months ago, and it became a little dicier last week when Florida’s Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from the ACC. Because Florida State’s home courts were moving faster than the ACC’s home courts, the likelihood of a devastating judicial loss for the conference increased.

Clemson athletic director Graham Neff praised the ACC and commissioner Jim Phillips for embracing an “innovative, progressive model” for revenue sharing.

“This will help strengthen the ACC,” Neff said. “A strong Clemson is good for the ACC, and a strong ACC is good for Clemson.”

The league’s long-term future is still murky because it’s only going to get easier and cheaper for the ACC’s biggest brands to bail. Then again, the ACC’s long-term future was already in jeopardy as the Big Ten and SEC gained strength. The settlement brings a few years of peace and the end of legal fees while giving the ACC time to regroup before the next realignment wave. Perhaps the conference’s brand and value rise enough to entice better programs if they have to replace teams in the coming years.

“I think this is going to make the conference better,” Florida State board of trustees chairperson Peter Collins said. “I think it’s going to incentivize people in the conference to really invest and for the conference to grow.”

North Carolina, Miami and Virginia: Winners

The Tar Heels are arguably the biggest winner, but we’ll lump the Hurricanes and Cavaliers in here, too.

North Carolina is one of the top brands in the ACC and just hired NFL legend Bill Belichick as their head coach. That’s a recipe for high ratings and, by extension, money. Though the Tar Heels did their due diligence on conference realignment, the school did not sue. As one former UNC trustee wrote in documents previously obtained by The Athletic: “Let FSU and Clemson pay the attorneys and see what happens.” The Seminoles and Tigers paid the bills. And what happened is that North Carolina can be among the schools best positioned to take advantage of the new system.

Miami’s football tradition, name recognition and encouraging growth under Mario Cristobal have the Hurricanes in a good spot, too, as wins and eyeballs become more lucrative. Virginia doesn’t have much recent football success, but it does have top-tier academics and an enticing local footprint. The Cavaliers would be among the league’s top potential Big Ten/SEC expansion targets, and the agreement gives them a way out if the opportunity comes.

The ACC’s bottom tier: ???

If there’s a loser, it’s the smaller brands that historically have struggled to contend for football titles (think, Syracuse, Wake Forest, Boston College and Georgia Tech). Those schools could lose money in the new model, and those losses will benefit their direct competitors; the poor will get poorer as the rich get richer. Then again, considering the propensity of the ACC’s big brands such as Miami (no ACC football titles), North Carolina (last title, 1980) and Florida State (five losing seasons in the past seven years) to underachieve, maybe we shouldn’t assume which schools will be cashing in.

But this tier wins something: stability. The risk of getting left behind like Washington State and Oregon State dropped significantly in the short term. That gives these schools time to position themselves to be more attractive in the next wave of realignment, whatever that looks like. The agreement also provides an avenue for this group to make more money. If Wake Forest wins 11 games (like in 2021) and is in the Playoff conversation (or actually in the CFP), the Demon Deacons will be in position to capitalize on the new revenue model. That’s better than simply giving larger checks to Florida State and Clemson.

What’s next?

Let’s not get ahead of ourselves: The settlement still has to be finalized. It’s a formality expected to be done within 30 days.

Scheduling remains a topic of conversation and, potentially, a path to more revenue. Notre Dame is a football independent but plays a handful of ACC teams each year. The Fighting Irish have expressed interest in playing more marquee opponents (like Clemson) and fewer games against lesser brands. Will ESPN be willing to pay more for more enticing games?

Finally, remember that general 2030-31 timeframe. TV contracts with the Big Ten, SEC, Big 12 and College Football Playoff are all set to expire between 2030 and 2034. But if — again, if — there’s going to be a major upheaval (SEC/Big Ten expansion, a super league system, etc.) it will probably happen as those contracts end. And every ACC program now has a clearer path to join in.

— The Athletic‘s Ralph D. Russo contributed to this story.

(Photo: Melina Myers / Imagn Images)